[plasmoic]

just a little question without meaning to distract the thread's main subject:
 
-what software is used for converting say 24/192 to 24/96? (in a MS system)

 

[Willakan]

Audacity should do the job.

 

[plasmoic]

Quote:

Audacity should do the job.

Tnx...its quite detailed
yet to sort out some batch work around

 

[Willakan]

http://manual.audacityteam.org/man/Batch_Processing

 

[plasmoic]

Quote:

http://manual.audacityteam.org/man/Batch_Processing

Thank you Willakan...actually it seems to be quite easy (although could not figure out how to add Flac parameters indicating the conversion from 192 to 96 kHz)...but just threw them in Audacity, changed the project rate from 192 to 96 and then used Export Multiple under File menu....the only bothering part is the slow import of each track...apart from that everything seems flowless...thank you again..
 
 
OP: didn't really mean hijacking the thread, my apologies if you feel so.
 
 

 

[vytman]

Just a question, I understand that the sample rate is a way to tell us the maximum frequency a recorded song can go, but what benefits do we have from bit depth?

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Just a question, I understand that the sample rate is a way to tell us the maximum frequency a recorded song can go, but what benefits do we have from bit depth?

Signal-to-noise ratio or dynamic range. When reconstructing a digital signal, there's some rounding that has to take place to create the analog signal. This rounding creates quantization noise. Every bit smooths the digital signal, so there's less rounding, so this noise is reduced by about 6 dB per bit. So 16 bit depth gives us a digital noise floor of ~96 dB, 24 bits gives up ~144 dB. Many DACs, even those that support 24 bits, don't even reach an electrical noise floor of -96 dB. No DAC reaches a noise floor of -144 dB.

 

[vytman]

Quote:

Signal-to-noise ratio or dynamic range. When reconstructing a digital signal, there's some rounding that has to take place to create the analog signal. This rounding creates quantization noise. Every bit smooths the digital signal, so there's less rounding, so this noise is reduced by about 6 dB per bit. So 16 bit depth gives us a digital noise floor of ~96 dB, 24 bits gives up ~144 dB. Many DACs, even those that support 24 bits, don't even reach an electrical noise floor of -96 dB. No DAC reaches a noise floor of -144 dB.

So you are saying that one can play the 24 bit music louder without loosing more quality than a 16 bit song? Also you will hear more details because the dynamic range, right?

 

[khaos974]

Quote:

Quote:

Signal-to-noise ratio or dynamic range. When reconstructing a digital signal, there's some rounding that has to take place to create the analog signal. This rounding creates quantization noise. Every bit smooths the digital signal, so there's less rounding, so this noise is reduced by about 6 dB per bit. So 16 bit depth gives us a digital noise floor of ~96 dB, 24 bits gives up ~144 dB. Many DACs, even those that support 24 bits, don't even reach an electrical noise floor of -96 dB. No DAC reaches a noise floor of -144 dB.

So you are saying that one can play the 24 bit music louder without loosing more quality than a 16 bit song? Also you will hear more details because the dynamic range, right?

In theory, yes.
In practice, it's rather useless considering several factors:
- most people on Head-Fi listen at 70/80 dB SPL average with 15 dB of headroom for musical peaks, that's about 95 dB SPL peaks most of the time.
- any room will have a background noise of 30 dB SPL, so any signal softer that that resides in the noise floor of the room.
 
Fun fact: THX Calibrated theaters typically play between 70/80 dB SPL average depending on the movie, the main speakers are only required to go up to 105 dB SPL.
 
 

 

[taylorpoz]

Loving the back and forth going on. I just wish I understood half of what you guys are saying lol

 

[vytman]

Quote:

In theory, yes.
In practice, it's rather useless considering several factors:
- most people on Head-Fi listen at 70/80 dB SPL average with 15 dB of headroom for musical peaks, that's about 95 dB SPL peaks most of the time.
- any room will have a background noise of 30 dB SPL, so any signal softer that that resides in the noise floor of the room.
 
Fun fact: THX Calibrated theaters typically play between 70/80 dB SPL average depending on the movie, the main speakers are only required to go up to 105 dB SPL.
 
 

I'm not sure I get it, so there aren't practical advantages choosing 24 bit over 16 bit? I feel I'm missing something lol. 


Quote:

Loving the back and forth going on. I just wish I understood half of what you guys are saying lol

 
I don't know how many times I've re-read this thread already

 

[BlackbeardBen]

Quote:

I'm not sure I get it, so there aren't practical advantages choosing 24 bit over 16 bit? I feel I'm missing something lol. 

 

For the most part, arguably, no.  Whatever audible advantage 24 bit has over properly dithered 16 bit as a storage format is very small if there is any advantage at all.  That's what the evidence so far (from properly conducted blind listening tests) supports, anyway.

 

[khaos974]

Increasing the dynamic range means that the noise floor of the music is lower, that softer details can be head and picked up, how soft? A 96 dB dynamic range means that the softest details are 96 dB softer than the loudest sound, but that concerns the music that was recorded on the CD.
 
When you play it back, at a normal listening volume, say 80 dB SPL average and 95 dB SPL for the musical peaks, it still means that the softest details are 96 dB softer, at - 1 dB SPL, at a range our ears can't pick up. And more than that, a room is never totally quite the background noise hangs at some 30 dB SPL, which means you could play louder, with the musical peaks at 106 dB SPL, the softest details are still played at 10 dB SPL, buried in the background noise of the room.
 
Considering that 16 bit = 96 dB allows to play very loud with ever losing details, it is considered sufficient for playback purpose.

 

[taylorpoz]

Ok so back to the point head injury made awhile back about recording and mastering being more important than bit rate or depth...
what exactly goes on the process of "mastering" a recording? What's the general purpose?

 

[DesireUsername]

Quote:

Mastering has a lot to do with making all the songs on an album sound similar.
Often a record is recorded over a period of a few days or weeks.
The finished product the Producer hands over to the mastering engineering may have problems such as:
 - different songs mixed slightly differently, making the album sound a bit incoherent, more reverb, les reverb, more bass, less bass from song to song.
 - different songs mixed a different levels, so the mastering engineer will adjust levels from song to song so they all have the same volume.
 - different songs compressed more or less than other songs
the record company (or producer or artist) may direct the mastering engineer to compress the whole album to make it as loud as possible.
The mastering enginer usually has the advantage of always mastering an album in the same room all the time, i.e same acoustics, same speakers.
The producer may work in different studios for different artists (or even different songs), so the producer may not really know the acoustics of the studio he has mixed in the way the mastering engineer understands the sound of the room the mastering engineer always masters in. 
 
Really the mastering engineer is a final set of ears listening to the album before it is transferred to CD (or other format).