The Myth of 'High Resolution' audio

[Macca]

We will have to do that soon.

Seriously though, you did not answer my question: Do you knew for a fact that they are the same master? You did say that you acquired a drive full of files but what info do you have on their pedigree?

[Marco]

Indeed, it's been too long since the last one. However, we should really have a go at sorting out that system of yours first!

Some I know for a fact are the same master (as I had a convo with Dunc about it), others not, and my opinion there is based simply on gut instinct, which as you know is something close to my heart

Marco.

[AlexM]

Distortion of low level signals is lower with 24 bit quantisation - have you looked at comparison of the waveforms at -90Db 16bit vs. 24bit? Check this out - http://www.stereophile.com/content/m...c-measurements

Is distortion at such a low level audible? that's another question, but I suspect that it is.

I tend to agree that higher sample rates aren't that big a deal - 48Khz is definitely better than 44Khz, 88.2/96Khz is probably all you need and 192Khz is a waste of time IMO. Quantisation does make more of a difference to me.

OTOH, storage is cheap, so my Vinyl rips are always 24/96Khz for archiving, but I usually downsample to 24/48 for day to day use. What does that tell me? with common source material, you don't give away much quality with integer down sampling 96Khz -> 48Khz. Bit depth reduction from 24 bits to 16 bits with triangular dither isn't a huge deal either. I think that I could tell the difference in an ABX, but I could live with it.

[Macca]

Distortion of low level signals is lower with 24 bit quantisation - have you looked at comparison of the waveforms at -90Db 16bit vs. 24bit? Check this out - http://www.stereophile.com/content/m...c-measurements

Is distortion at such a low level audible? that's another question, but I suspect that it is.

.

This is where we get into those marginal grey areas which I accept do exist. That's why I mentioned the possibility that frequencies higher than 22KHz, whilst being inaudible to humans, may have an impact on the reproduction of lower frequencies. As you say the additional bits (dynamic range) are not doing anything useful and any case only relate to dynamics and not the 'quality' of the sound reproduction in any case.

The point of my OP was that hi-rez audio is not in any way like hi-rez television. I think it is important that enthusiasts should be aware of that as it is pretty basic and relevant information.

[Jimbo]

This is where we get into those marginal grey areas which I accept do exist. That's why I mentioned the possibility that frequencies higher than 22KHz, whilst being inaudible to humans, may have an impact on the reproduction of lower frequencies. As you say the additional bits (dynamic range) are not doing anything useful and any case only relate to dynamics and not the 'quality' of the sound reproduction in any case.

The point of my OP was that hi-rez audio is not in any way like hi-rez television. I think it is important that enthusiasts should be aware of that as it is pretty basic and relevant information.

Wish High Rez audio sounded as good as High Rez televisions looks

[struth]

Think -10db is the human threshold of normal hearing so I would doubt it

[Stratmangler]

We have bits - 16 bit, 48 bit and 96 bit

Do we?

[Gazjam]

this'll be fun...

[Marco]

I'm scratching my bits now.

Marco.

[Jimbo]

I'm scratching my bits now.

Marco.

You need to get some cream for that