"24/192 Music downloads, and why they make no sense" - Page 4 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > General Interest > Everything Else

Everything Else Anything related to audio / video / electronics etc) BUT remember- we have many new forums where your thread may now fit! .... Parts, Equipment & Tools, Construction Tips, Software Tools......

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 7th March 2012, 02:14 PM   #31
Just DIY!
diyAudio Member
 
pinnocchio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Montreal
To me and probably many others, listening to music is a pleasure and entertainment. I don't really spend time listening to 4 seconds passage to compare A and B in a repetitive loop just to know if there is more distortion, etc...

If it sounds good to my ears and is pleasurable then it is a win, otherwise I just put aside and don't waste time on it... Maybe only listen to it in the car where it matter less...

I do however have high respects for those who take that time to make it more a science.

Ciao!
Do
__________________
PREAMPs : AMB α10 + JC-80 clone | Balanced DCB1 | LDR3x | AMPs: AMB β24 | Aleph 5 | FirstOne | ML-2 | TSSA | Telos 390 Clone | My_Ref FE
DACs : TPA Buffalo II + OPC's NTD1 I/V | TPA OPUS + IVY III | Moon 380D DSD Speakers : Jim Holtz Statements | Astasia SD | Tubasson Mark 2
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 03:12 PM   #32
DF96 is offline DF96  England
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
So are we saying that the difference can be heard, but only on the quiet passages (or 'silence') when it is boosted by 20dB above normal listening level? For normal music listening that is the same as saying that the difference cannot be heard? This is what is meant by "huge difference"?
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 03:44 PM   #33
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakmont PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
I'm not sure whether you don't understand what you are saying, or I don't understand what you are saying. Below half the sample rate you can reproduce the input whatever its frequency. You either have enough samples (below Nyquist rate) or not enough (above Nyquist rate).
If I have a 48K sample rate and am just reproducing a 100 Hz. tone I have way more samples than I need. So with smart software IF the encoding is done to say 24 bit accuracy you can bounce the output +/- the LSB to get more resolution. This also requires that your 16 bit DA is 24 bit linear.

So in theory it is possible to get better resolution at frequencies below the Nyquist limit. Of course there are no real 24 bit converters or 16 bit converters that are more than 16 bit accurate!
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 03:48 PM   #34
expert in tautology
diyAudio Member
 
bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York State USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron E View Post
Exactly. People who dispute this just don't understand sampling. It is very instructive to play with DSP and input frequencies near the nyquist limit without an anti-aliasing filter.

I have crunched 24/96 down to 16/44 and heard no difference at all. Does that mean I am deaf, no because some guys (Meyer and Moran) did the same thing in 2007 and published a JAES paper about it and under double blind conditions, nobody could tell the difference with music signals.
Ron, you have to be very very careful about the point of reference used in any testing. For example a certain Arny K used to send around a CD that was supposed to demonstrate the lack of audible difference between two or more "conditions". Sure enough, no difference was audible. Problem is/was that with the particular source material chosen nobody could possibly hear any differences unless they were GROSS differences.

The selection of source material is key and critical.

Then the specific signal chain used is also key and critical.

What this means to me is that in most situations, for most recordings there is little or no audible difference to be heard between things like higher and lower bit rates and bit depths. It really does not matter for most people on most systems. But that does not exclude the situations where it can be audible and makes a difference.

These papers and tests really should limit their conclusions to the specific test conditions under which the test was made, despite their interests or desires to state that they can be generalized to all situations. Maybe if there was enough independent corroboration via similar tests using equal or better test conditions, then it might be reasonable to extend the perimeter of inclusion wider. Imo, of course.

Also, it is important to leave room for undocumented or documented confounding factors, and the effects of masking (if any)...

Needless to say I am skeptical of most of these "tests" since I find the lack of controls and full disclosure of the test conditions to be troubling.

Ymmv.

_-_-bear
__________________
_-_-bear
http://www.bearlabs.com -- Btw, I don't actually know anything, FYI -- [...2SJ74 Toshiba bogus asian parts - beware! ]
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 03:50 PM   #35
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
Sin Bin
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
So are we saying that the difference can be heard, but only on the quiet passages (or 'silence') when it is boosted by 20dB above normal listening level? For normal music listening that is the same as saying that the difference cannot be heard? This is what is meant by "huge difference"?
I'm not following you, are you saying there is no difference between 16 bit vs 24 bit .... ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 03:58 PM   #36
DF96 is offline DF96  England
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000
you can bounce the output +/- the LSB to get more resolution
Isn't this what dither does?

Quote:
Originally Posted by a.wayne
are you saying there is no difference between 16 bit vs 24 bit
You tell me there is a huge difference. Others tell me there is a small difference which can only be heard on quiet passages when boosted by 20db, which seems to me to be no difference for normal listening. Tests appear to show no difference. Who do I believe?
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 04:10 PM   #37
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
Useful definition of "accuracy" for audio is entirely in the dynamic specs - spurious free dynamic range, distortion, noise # are better than 16 bits for many ADC, DAC chips today

nearly 20 years ago I used a 100 kHz 16 bit ADC with internal auto calibration promising 18 bit linearity – and I was able to resolve and verify the “below lsb” linearity with averaging


I would rather see higher sample rates at 16 bit than more of the totally foolish 24/44 Beatles releases

Higher sample rate would address any lingering debate over highest human audio frequency perception capability and allow totally inaudible dither+noise shaping by pushing it to ultrasonic frequencies beyond the analog reconstruction filter corner frequency
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 04:21 PM   #38
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear View Post

These papers and tests really should limit their conclusions to the specific test conditions under which the test was made, despite their interests or desires to state that they can be generalized to all situations. ...

Needless to say I am skeptical of most of these "tests" since I find the lack of controls and full disclosure of the test conditions to be troubling.
So since Meyer and Moran were careful not to draw a "generalized" conclusion, tested in a variety of systems, and disclosed controls and test conditions, you have no problem with their work, presumably. I quite liked their conclusion, which basically said, we can't find a situation where the differences between 16/44 and hi res can be heard, if you disagree, let's see your data.
__________________
And while they may not be as strong as apes, don't lock eyes with 'em, don't do it. Puts 'em on edge. They might go into berzerker mode; come at you like a whirling dervish, all fists and elbows.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 05:09 PM   #39
diyAudio Member
 
lduarte1973's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lisbon
so why does upsampling sound better to me ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2012, 05:59 PM   #40
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
Sin Bin
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
You tell me there is a huge difference. Others tell me there is a small difference which can only be heard on quiet passages when boosted by 20db, which seems to me to be no difference for normal listening. Tests appear to show no difference. Who do I believe?
So your issue is not with there being a difference, your Issue is with the word "huge"...?

I guess first we have to define huge, it might mean something else to you , the difference is huge to me. Do you believe all speakers or all audio systems have the same resolve, I'm sure there are systems/setups where there would be no difference ..

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post
Useful definition of "accuracy" for audio is entirely in the dynamic specs - spurious free dynamic range, distortion, noise # are better than 16 bits for many ADC, DAC chips today

nearly 20 years ago I used a 100 kHz 16 bit ADC with internal auto calibration promising 18 bit linearity – and I was able to resolve and verify the “below lsb” linearity with averaging. I would rather see higher sample rates at 16 bit than more of the totally foolish 24/44 Beatles releases

Higher sample rate would address any lingering debate over highest human audio frequency perception capability and allow totally inaudible dither+noise shaping by pushing it to ultrasonic frequencies beyond the analog reconstruction filter corner frequency
Try 24/96, 24/44 .1 is an improvement by the way , I would prefer all to go 24bit with sampling frequency anywhere from 44.1-192 Khz...

Quote:
Originally Posted by lduarte1973 View Post
so why does upsampling sound better to me ?
Not sure, with high resolution systems or headphones , you can hear the noise ( grain) maybe poor system resolution

Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
So since Meyer and Moran were careful not to draw a "generalized" conclusion, tested in a variety of systems, and disclosed controls and test conditions, you have no problem with their work, presumably. I quite liked their conclusion, which basically said, we can't find a situation where the differences between 16/44 and hi res can be heard, if you disagree, let's see your data.
What data would suffice, how would this test have to be conducted for it to be satisfactory to your taste , ohhh for the record , they are wrong , I cannot agree with their conclusion..

One may agree or not that Hi-res sounds better, but there is no denying there is an sonic difference. Anyone can devise an liar , liar situation if that is their intent.

I'm sure you are aware of such .................

Last edited by a.wayne; 7th March 2012 at 06:02 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What Does Fostex "Rated Input" and "Music Power" mark02131 Full Range 5 13th October 2012 06:18 AM
New 24/192 "album" from SoundKeeper ronzeman Music 0 9th September 2010 05:07 PM
Linear voltage regulator: how to make good use of "sense" and "ground sense"? NeoY2k Analog Line Level 7 7th September 2008 12:35 AM
192/24 spdif soundcard ESI Julia vs Audiophile 192 vs ...? stolbovoy Digital Source 5 12th October 2005 07:25 PM
when does using a subwoofer make sense in a music-only setup? keyser Subwoofers 48 22nd November 2004 08:57 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:29 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2