adamdea;694734 Wrote: > Deep Deep Deep sigh. > I have noticed this bloke being cited as an authority, but frankly just > being a record producer means jack shit. > > As far as i can work out this is a variant on the "distortion of cd at > -60DB is 100%" nonsense. It is just plain wrong and stupid, and if > written in the answer to an exam question would simply be marked as > wrong. > > It is not "up for debate" or "a matter of perspective" it is just plain > gloriously wrong, and anyone purporting to know what they are talking > about who repeats this rubbish should be shunned in polite society, or > preferably pelted with manure. > > IT IS COMPREHENSIVELY DEALT WITH IN THE ARTICLE LINKED IN THE OP > (headed the dynamic range of 16 bit) > > One more time: a correctly dithered 16 bit signal may have broad > spectrum noise at -93dB, but that doesn't prevent it from being able to > resolve a signal well below that level. This is because the noise level > in each portion of the spectrum is much lower than -93Db (even without > noise shaping). Hence it is demonstrably possible to resolve a tone at > -120DB in a 16 bit recording. > > > So that harmonic information at -36DB below peak? Its still about 80 Db > louder than the quietest noise you can encode and resolve with 16 bits. > Even if its -36dB below a quiet noise at -40Db its still only -77dB. > You have still got 40Db to play with. > > And there is no such thing as "encoded with only 12 bits". if this had > any meaning you would not be able to record anything with a 1 bit > stream (DSD). > > So no, Barry Diament has not shown anything. > > and btw I don't an instant believe that he has "shown" that he can tell > 24 bit files from 16 bit under sensible and meaningful conditions.
Great response! I respect Barry D and his excellent masters of stuff like ELP, Warren Zevon and Bob Marley through the years. But when it comes to hardware and opinions on 16/24 bits and sample rates, I really have to wonder. A number of months ago I remember him on Steve Hoffman board talking about how 24/192 was so much better than 24/96 (I think he even claimed this jump was even more significant than 44 --> 96!). Here's a small snippet: "All that said, I'm glad to see HDTracks introducing the 4x rates. To my ears, when they are well done (an important qualifier), 24/176 and 24/192 cross a threshold and give us what digital promised from the start but is only now starting to deliver - a truly superior medium for recording and playback." (http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=238244) Then there's this nugget: http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=265346 Apparently he can hear differences with realtime decoding of FLAC which he attributes to jitter (I know I'm digressing here). Oh well... Bottom line: Enjoy Barry's work on producing good music with decent dynamic range, etc. His opinions on audio otherwise should be taken with large grains of salt / alcohol / hallucinogens. -- Archimago ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93990 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
