[Headzone]

When I compared 24bit and 16bit output from my pc (At 44khz) I thought for a second 24bit sounded better. My music files are all 16bit I guess. Does that mean I'm imagining things?

 

[stv014]

In exactly what way did they sound better ? Did you use software volume control or any other processing ?

 

[Headzone]

Dunno, just more clear and bit more dynamic sound I guess? I didn't do any further comparison tho,  just felt 24bit was better before I started researching on the subject. 
 
I think the sound is coming through asio drivers, no processing or digital volume altered.

 

[bigshot]

  Dunno, just more clear and bit more dynamic sound I guess? I didn't do any further comparison tho,  just felt 24bit was better before I started researching on the subject. 
 
I think the sound is coming through asio drivers, no processing or digital volume altered.

 
Here we do level matched blind A/B tests to determine that.

 

[xdog]

I have to share something about 24bits; especially vinyl rips with 24bits
Since I haven't seen a vinyl for a while (and I havent mesured it), I'll assume that the height of the vinyl row is something like 1-2mm (even less),
that is 10^(-3)m; but the distance between atoms is something between 0.1-0,2nm which is 10^(-10) m;
If we take (for simplicity) some organized material, like diamond, or even better graphits, the in the row we can represent
maximum 10^7 ~= 2^23 levels (and that is a real physical obstacle);
And if I think of 1 layer of atoms, which is insane, than I come to conclusion that at least 4 layers is maximum accuracy
(due to random atomic movement, that everytime you touch your vinyl you nano-scratch it or pressure it, since it is not diamond),
which means real bit-level like 2^20-21.
And even more if you imagine the needle of you gramophone (wich is more likely NOT a atomic force microscope) and the recording process,
than you probably get the accuracy counted in hundreths of layers of atoms (16 bit or more).
The same applies to microphones and speakers, since 24bits is atomic distance precision.

 

[skamp]

You're completely ignoring the inherently high noise floor of vinyl records.

 

[nick_charles]

  I have to share something about 24bits; especially vinyl rips with 24bits
Since I haven't seen a vinyl for a while (and I havent mesured it), I'll assume that the height of the vinyl row is something like 1-2mm (even less),
that is 10^(-3)m; but the distance between atoms is something between 0.1-0,2nm which is 10^(-10) m;
If we take (for simplicity) some organized material, like diamond, or even better graphits, the in the row we can represent
maximum 10^7 ~= 2^23 levels (and that is a real physical obstacle);
And if I think of 1 layer of atoms, which is insane, than I come to conclusion that at least 4 layers is maximum accuracy
(due to random atomic movement, that everytime you touch your vinyl you nano-scratch it or pressure it, since it is not diamond),
which means real bit-level like 2^20-21.
And even more if you imagine the needle of you gramophone (wich is more likely NOT a atomic force microscope) and the recording process,
than you probably get the accuracy counted in hundreths of layers of atoms (16 bit or more).
The same applies to microphones and speakers, since 24bits is atomic distance precision.

 
here is a good link for the molecular physics involved http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/iandm/part12/page2.html

 

[proton007]

I have to share something about 24bits; especially vinyl rips with 24bits
Since I haven't seen a vinyl for a while (and I havent mesured it), I'll assume that the height of the vinyl row is something like 1-2mm (even less),

that is 10^(-3)m; but the distance between atoms is something between 0.1-0,2nm which is 10^(-10) m;
If we take (for simplicity) some organized material, like diamond, or even better graphits, the in the row we can represent

maximum 10^7 ~= 2^23 levels (and that is a real physical obstacle);
And if I think of 1 layer of atoms, which is insane, than I come to conclusion that at least 4 layers is maximum accuracy

(due to random atomic movement, that everytime you touch your vinyl you nano-scratch it or pressure it, since it is not diamond),

which means real bit-level like 2^20-21.
And even more if you imagine the needle of you gramophone (wich is more likely NOT a atomic force microscope) and the recording process,

than you probably get the accuracy counted in hundreths of layers of atoms (16 bit or more).
The same applies to microphones and speakers, since 24bits is atomic distance precision.

That's interesting. In order to physically support 24 bits the vinyl grooves will have to be deeper.
This also implies that the typical 24bit vinyl rips are 16bit at best.

 

[xnor]

Vinyl ... 12 - 13 bits are enough.

 

[spagetka]

I love this thread. From time to time come back and read nice posts and believe me or not I am always smiling.
 
Guys with super technical skills and arguments one by one - what about a nice ABX test 320vbr mp3 vs CD or even 192vbr vs CD? Remember that result 9 or better out of 10...
 
Edit:
Helloooo? Nobody? I live in Prague (CZ) and Bratislava (SK) so no problem to visit Austria as it is not far away...
 
Edit:
Where are you?

 

[reginalb]

Well, this thread was an awesome read. I only made it through the first 14 pages. By then it was: 
 
"[Scientific reasons that there is no reason to playback anything above 16-bits (although 24-bits is definitely useful during the production process)]" - Gregorio
 
"YOU'RE AN IDIOT STOP WITH THE FACTS." - People that, like Steven Colbert, don't like books ("They're all facts, no heart")
 
Seriously though. This thread was an outstanding read. I own a decent amount of 24-bit audio. I did some ABX testing after converting those files to 16/44.1, and I could hear the difference. I also learned why (dBpoweramp probably isn't the best tool) 

 
I will probably still buy 96 (no more 192) or 16/44.1 from Acoustic Sounds. I like that they disclose who did the mastering, and how it was done. And that they're probably not in to the whole "loudness" thing. I think the music I get from them sounds great, but I have long bought hi-res (for some genres of music, like jazz) not because I thought the "resolution" mattered, but I hoped that the companies mastering them were taking better care of the files. 
 
Case in point, of the many copies of Ella and Louis that I own, the one from Quality Record Pressings on 200-gram vinyl sounds better than anything else that I have heard. But I firmly believe that it's down to the master (they do all their own). That I get to play it on my sweet turntable is just a bonus
 
Alright, I have gone on a bit of an aside, but I do wish I Would have ventured in to the Sound Science section of the forum sooner in my first couple of years here. 
 
Thanks Gregorio, very good read!

 

[k3oxkjo]

You're completely ignoring the inherently high noise floor of vinyl records.

 
If you're in digital land, that's "dither", LOL.

 

[xnor]

Yeah but the noise only becomes comparable if you're down to 13 or 12 bits...

 

[Digitalchkn]

  Yeah but the noise only becomes comparable if you're down to 13 or 12 bits...

Noise characteristics of vinyl noise or tape noise are not quite the same as those of digital noise (either due to quantization, dithering, jitter etc.).
 
But another way to look at it, if you consider including vinyl noise as part of the signal you want to capture digitally then I can argue that you need higher resolution to capture everything full detail from vinyl.

 

[bigshot]

The dynamic range of analogue audio fits within redbook with room to spare. And clicks, even super fast clicks on 78s, operate on a scale much larger than digital sampling. High resolution audio is totally wasted on analogue captures. All it makes is bigger files that are slower to process.