24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded!

[Greenears]

   
Enough people claim to hear a difference that it makes me think that looking at it from a strictly scientific point of view is very limiting. After all, there is little-to-no transparency from labels or engineers, so how do we know for sure?
 

 
ABX testing in your future I see, young padawan.
 
The reality is that only 0.1% of people claim to hear differences in anything the rest are oblivious.  The 0.1% are just over-represented on forums, self selecting.  But the interesting part is even those that claim a difference can't pass an ABX test.  When that event happens you get two reactions:  Disbelief in the test, or realization how strong the power of suggestion is.  Suggestion and imitation is very strong in primates, there is a reason the saying is "monkey see monkey do".  It provides many advantages for group survival but it does lead to people blindly buying 24 bit files because "they are better".
 
Anyhow you don't have to believe me - ABX plugin with foobar is very easy it takes 5 minutes to set up.  Just make sure you convert your own file from CD redbook so you know there were no differences in the source.  Try out uncompressed vs MP3 192 it will open your mind.

 

[U2Bono269]

   
ABX testing in your future I see, young padawan.
 
The reality is that only 0.1% of people claim to hear differences in anything the rest are oblivious.  The 0.1% are just over-represented on forums, self selecting.  But the interesting part is even those that claim a difference can't pass an ABX test.  When that event happens you get two reactions:  Disbelief in the test, or realization how strong the power of suggestion is.  Suggestion and imitation is very strong in primates, there is a reason the saying is "monkey see monkey do".  It provides many advantages for group survival but it does lead to people blindly buying 24 bit files because "they are better".
 
Anyhow you don't have to believe me - ABX plugin with foobar is very easy it takes 5 minutes to set up.  Just make sure you convert your own file from CD redbook so you know there were no differences in the source.  Try out uncompressed vs MP3 192 it will open your mind.

 
Wow, this is getting kafkaesque. I've addressed all of those things in previous posts. Now, I know that I'm struggling to express myself due to lack of experience, but we seem to be speaking different languages. I came to this thread because it was the most active and it was reading this thread that sparked my interest. But I'm clearly in the wrong place.

 

[bigshot]

  I think that lossless does sound better to me than compressed audio
I guess I was just wondering if what you guys do, i.e., making your own exact comparisons, is the same thing they do in a professional setting.

 
Yes. I do line level matched, direct A/B switched comparisons. I've done this comparing lossless and compressed audio and I've determined that there is a bitrate where lossy becomes audibly identical to lossless. If you are interested in finding out for yourself, I have put together a listening test of three different compression codecs at three different bitrates along with the lossless original. I'd be happy to send it to you. You listen and send me back a ranking of the ten samples. Then I'll let you know which sample was which. I bet you can't tell a difference in any of them. I've handed this test out to dozens of people and no one has been able to yet.

 

[U2Bono269]

   
Yes. I do line level matched, direct A/B switched comparisons. I've done this comparing lossless and compressed audio and I've determined that there is a bitrate where lossy becomes audibly identical to lossless. If you are interested in finding out for yourself, I have put together a listening test of three different compression codecs at three different bitrates along with the lossless original. I'd be happy to send it to you. You listen and send me back a ranking of the ten samples. Then I'll let you know which sample was which. I bet you can't tell a difference in any of them. I've handed this test out to dozens of people and no one has been able to yet.

Thanks, but no. I have no interest in downsampling my music. I will keep my FLACs and ALACs...hard drive space is dirt cheap. Please stop bludgeoning me with this. Even if the difference I hear is purely a placebo, it increases my enjoyment. Like I said, my question was about mastering and/or processing differences in creating the files we see in places like Pono and HDTracks, and the relation to the bit depth.
 
The takeaway for me is that if I know a 24bit hi-res version of an album is a different master, or in some way processed differently (difficult to determine, I know), then it's a worthwhile purchase for me. If it's the same as the CD version I have or could buy, it is not worthwhile.

 

[RRod]

  I think that lossless does sound better to me than compressed audio, so there's no contradiction there. My question was related to 24bit audio specifically, and how much of it is related to mastering or the conversion process. I'm still learning all of this stuff, so I'm probably not as eloquent as I'd like to be, so sorry if there's any confusion.
 
I guess I was just wondering if what you guys do, i.e., making your own exact comparisons, is the same thing they do in a professional setting. Enough people claim to hear a difference that it makes me think that looking at it from a strictly scientific point of view is very limiting. After all, there is little-to-no transparency from labels or engineers, so how do we know for sure?
 
This has been good though Lots to think about and learn about.

 
The issue is that people who claim to "hear a difference" never do any test blind, which is the first rule in being objective about things involving human choice. If I just bought a $2000 amp, you bet my mind will want it to sound better than my $99 entry-level Magni. But that isn't necessarily the truth as far as my ears are concerned. And so it is with 24bit recordings. There is no track I have found that shows either analytical or audible proof that 24bits is superior to 16bits for playback. And it only takes one track… just one. The pro-24bit-delivery crowd need only find one music track where 24bits delivers a perceptible and beneficial* difference in sound quality at the user end; where is it?
 
*I say beneficial because it is trivial to devise a music file that uses 24bits, but if I have to adjust the volume while I'm listening to it then it's not a beneficial experience.

 

[bigshot]

  Even if the difference I hear is purely a placebo, it increases my enjoyment. Like I said, my question was about mastering and/or processing differences in creating the files we see in places like Pono and HDTracks, and the relation to the bit depth.

 
Well, if the difference between compressed and lossless is placebo, you can bet the difference between lossless and high bitrate/sampling rate file is going to be placebo too. Transparent is transparent.
 
When it comes to the quality of mastering, that has absolutely no relationship to the format. Some LPs sound better than CDs, some stuff at the iTunes store in AAC sounds better than at HD tracks. Some SACDs sound downright lousy. Mastering is entirely separate from the format. It all depends on the taste and experience of the engineer doing the mastering. "Remastered" doesn't necessarily mean "better". Sometimes music is poorly remastered and sounded better in an older format. To find that out, you need to talk to music collectors, not audiophiles.

 

[U2Bono269]

   
The issue is that people who claim to "hear a difference" never do any test blind, which is the first rule in being objective about things involving human choice. If I just bought a $2000 amp, you bet my mind will want it to sound better than my $99 entry-level Magni. But that isn't necessarily the truth as far as my ears are concerned. And so it is with 24bit recordings. There is no track I have found that shows either analytical or audible proof that 24bits is superior to 16bits for playback. And it only takes one track… just one. The pro-24bit-delivery crowd need only find one music track where 24bits delivers a perceptible and beneficial* difference in sound quality at the user end; where is it?
 
*I say beneficial because it is trivial to devise a music file that uses 24bits, but if I have to adjust the volume while I'm listening to it then it's not a beneficial experience.

 
And if you've read my previous posts here, I haven't disagreed with that sentiment. I've also stated that I have no capability at the moment to listen to 24bit tracks. I DO believe that in a strict, perfect comparison, 24bit and 16bit are indistinguishable. I have come to this conclusion based on what I've read in this thread and others, and also using what I know of human hearing and the creation of the Redbook standard. You will get no argument from me on that, though I'm still interested to listen for myself, of course. Like I said, I have 2 HDTracks albums...I bought U2's Achtung Baby album because I'm a U2-collector, and I have Damien Rice's My Favourite Fantasy because I didn't want the CD. I also recently bought a used iBasso DX50 as an upgrade to my iPod. So I will listen to those tracks when I receive it.
 
Here's the scenario that I'm thinking of when I ask these questions...
 
I know that My Favourite Fantasy will sound the same as my 16bit version, because I downsampled it from the 24bit. Again, no argument from me on that one. But I'm not 100% sure what's in store for me with Achtung Baby. I have the CD version of the same Achtung Baby release (the Deluxe Edition) to compare it to. Based on what I've read, I would assume they come from the same master.
 
So, assuming they're the same master, if I listen to, say, Zoo Station from the CD FLAC, and the Zoo Station from the HDTracks FLAC, they will sound the same, right? I expect them to sound the same. I didn't buy those albums thinking "oh man, this is going to sound so much better!"
 
But what if my expectations are wrong? What if I listen to the HDTracks version and I think it sounds different? Scientifically, what might account for that?

 

[bigshot]

  So, assuming they're the same master, if I listen to, say, Zoo Station from the CD FLAC, and the Zoo Station from the HDTracks FLAC, they will sound the same, right?

 
Well, if they are the same mastering, they will have the exact same sound quality to human ears, but whether you hear them as being the same depends on things like expectation bias and placebo.

 

[U2Bono269]

   
Well, if they are the same mastering, they will have the exact same sound quality to human ears, but whether you hear them as being the same depends on things like expectation bias and placebo.

 
My expectation bias is that they would sound the same. However, isn't it true that for proper ABX testing, the 16bit file must be made from 24bit file? Does the fact that they are each unique spoil the results?

 

[Greenears]

   
Wow, this is getting kafkaesque. I've addressed all of those things in previous posts. Now, I know that I'm struggling to express myself due to lack of experience, but we seem to be speaking different languages. I came to this thread because it was the most active and it was reading this thread that sparked my interest. But I'm clearly in the wrong place.

 
Why would a simple program you run on windows that takes less than 2 minutes to install fully with broadband be "Kafkaesque"? You were the one that said you cold hear the difference between lossy and lossless, so why not just give it a whirl instead of spending so much time reading and writing posts on forums?  You can tell us you don't like it after you tried it.  I know I know you're part of the "I don't need to" crowd.  Then what's your question exactly?

 

[RRod]

   
And if you've read my previous posts here, I haven't disagreed with that sentiment. I've also stated that I have no capability at the moment to listen to 24bit tracks. I DO believe that in a strict, perfect comparison, 24bit and 16bit are indistinguishable. I have come to this conclusion based on what I've read in this thread and others, and also using what I know of human hearing and the creation of the Redbook standard. You will get no argument from me on that, though I'm still interested to listen for myself, of course. Like I said, I have 2 HDTracks albums...I bought U2's Achtung Baby album because I'm a U2-collector, and I have Damien Rice's My Favourite Fantasy because I didn't want the CD. I also recently bought a used iBasso DX50 as an upgrade to my iPod. So I will listen to those tracks when I receive it.
 
Here's the scenario that I'm thinking of when I ask these questions...
 
I know that My Favourite Fantasy will sound the same as my 16bit version, because I downsampled it from the 24bit. Again, no argument from me on that one. But I'm not 100% sure what's in store for me with Achtung Baby. I have the CD version of the same Achtung Baby release (the Deluxe Edition) to compare it to. Based on what I've read, I would assume they come from the same master.
 
So, assuming they're the same master, if I listen to, say, Zoo Station from the CD FLAC, and the Zoo Station from the HDTracks FLAC, they will sound the same, right? I expect them to sound the same. I didn't buy those albums thinking "oh man, this is going to sound so much better!"
 
But what if my expectations are wrong? What if I listen to the HDTracks version and I think it sounds different? Scientifically, what might account for that?

 
Well then you get into the business of comparing masters. The good first thing to try is to put the two versions into something like Audio DiffMaker and see what it comes up with for a difference. This will let you eek out things like differences equalization and channel balances. For instance, here's the spectrogram of the difference file that I get from bass-boosting one of my tracks:

 
If I listen to this file, I indeed hear a bass-heavy version of the track.

 

[U2Bono269]

   
Why would a simple program you run on windows that takes less than 2 minutes to install fully with broadband be "Kafkaesque"? You were the one that said you cold hear the difference between lossy and lossless, so why not just give it a whirl instead of spending so much time reading and writing posts on forums?  You can tell us you don't like it after you tried it.  I know I know you're part of the "I don't need to" crowd.  Then what's your question exactly?

 
Because I stated in a previous post that I have done ABX testing between mp3s and FLACs, yet multiple posters keep suggesting I do it as if I never said it to begin with...

 

[bigshot]

If you get the 16 and 24 from two different sources, you can't be sure the mastering is the same. That's why you make the 16 from the 24 yourself to test. You want to remove irrelevant variables and focus on what you are testing for. If you are testing just for the difference between 16 and 24 bit, you just want to test for that and not have other factors muddy the waters.

 

[bigshot]

   
Because I stated in a previous post that I have done ABX testing between mp3s and FLACs, yet multiple posters keep suggesting I do it as if I never said it to begin with...

What codec? What bitrate? Did you make the compressed files yourself or did you compare a CD to an iTunes download? Did you line level match? Did you have direct A/B switching? Did you compare the samples blind? You have to test carefully to get accurate results.

 

[U2Bono269]

   
Well then you get into the business of comparing masters. The good first thing to try is to put the two versions into something like Audio DiffMaker and see what it comes up with for a difference. This will let you eek out things like differences equalization and channel balances. For instance, here's the spectrogram of the difference file that I get from bass-boosting one of my tracks:

 
If I listen to this file, I indeed hear a bass-heavy version of the track.

 
I get that, which brings me back to my original (hypothetical) question...is it possible for a 24bit version of the same release, as in my Achtung Baby example, to sound different for any reason? If the comparison is not made from the same source/format file, is the sound different? Based on your answer above, it seems possible? Has anyone explicitly tested this??