Stratmangler;499634 Wrote:
EMI did future proof the Beatles remastering project as far as was
possible - see this article
http://www.theinsider.com/news/2102658_Re_Mastering_the_BEATLES_Catalog_The_Process
I agree that the sample rate seems to be the key to improved audio -
most of the
On 15/01/10 12:23, dcolak wrote:
It's really not necessary to have anything above 44.1Khz (resolution)
and 24bit (dynamic range), unless you can hear sounds over 22Khz.
This is true *only* in theory and when specific assumptions are made.
Check the Nyquist theorem:
dcolak;506624 Wrote:
It's really not necessary to have anything above 44.1Khz (resolution)
and 24bit (dynamic range), unless you can hear sounds over 22Khz.
Check the Nyquist theorem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem
The 24 bit issue is still over
Way out of my league and level of patience, but it's a nice reminder
where that great sound and warm glow comes from. I picked it up off a
DIY site.
The video is at the bottom.
http://paillard.claude.free.fr/
--
kphinney
-I like it, you may not. I understand and respect that.-
This is next on my list of post-apocalyptic skills to master by 2012.
--
seanadams
seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3
View this thread:
Is 32 bits really needed or is this just a marketing ploy?
http://www.simaudio.com/moon750D.htm
--
Kellen
Kellen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16569
View this thread:
Kellen wrote:
Is 32 bits really needed or is this just a marketing ploy?
Needed for what?
Human's can not hear more than was a well recorded 16 bit signal contains.
Its good to use longer signals when mixing, doing effects, etc.
Its 99% marketing when they sell 24 bit recordings.
88.2 Hz
From their website:
...the MOON 750D is extremely flexible and exemplifies a luxurious
lifestyle.
Seriously though, does anybody even publish 32 bit music?
--
georgeh
Just a radio... for now.
georgeh's Profile:
georgeh wrote:
Seriously though, does anybody even publish 32 bit music?
That can't be a serious question. If there is some audiofool who will
pay more for 32 bit or even 64 bit, then someone will sell it.
It may have only RedBook data on it, like many SACDs, but there is
nothing wrong with
I think 32 bit is mostly used to lower noise floor.
Also, if transporter had 32bit input, I would send the output from Sox
as 32-bit, to minimize rounding errors
RE: 16bit vs 24bit music: of course I hear the difference. I hear all
the little nuances now, which were hidden by 16-bit precision.
Marketing buzzwords , many dacs and processors use oversampling
upsampling and all kind of mathematics to process audio, mostly to
counteract filter artifacts and such problems move the noise spectra
somewhere benign etc.
My meridian HT preamp uses 64bit floating point internally, but it
still a
michael123 wrote:
I think 32 bit is mostly used to lower noise floor.
Huh? RedBook has a SNR of 96dB. That is already way below audible.
24 bit takes the SNR is 144 dB.
In absolute silence, 144 dB will cause ear damage. Not probably, will.
Or as OSHA says, maximum allowed exposure to 115 dB is
Is this the rms figures ? music peaks are very fast fortunately
(milliseconds).
It's not a problem to see peaks ~115dB on a dance floor.
Here in Sweden i think we have an 85dB limit for 8 hour exposure ( a
workday ) otherwise ear protection is mandatory. don't remember if it is
a or c curve.
I think the word length used (32bit) has to do with the more recent chip
used, NOT the music signal itself. It's used to lower artifacts, not
SNR.
I doubt 16bit chips will still exist in a few years...
--
Themis
SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Cyrus 8xp - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus
Themis;506978 Wrote:
I think the word length used (32bit) has to do with the more recent chip
used, NOT the music signal itself. It's used to lower artifacts, not
SNR.
This is what I actually meant.
As with Transporter, where measurable resolution (e.g. output voltage)
is merely 21bit, I do
Themis wrote:
I think the word length used (32bit) has to do with the more recent chip
used, NOT the music signal itself. It's used to lower artifacts, not
SNR.
Which specific artifacts?
I doubt 16bit chips will still exist in a few years...
Externally 16 bits? I will bet that they sure
MadScientist;505764 Wrote:
I'm trying to do some testing but I'm not sure I'm using sox correctly
as I keep getting files of vastly different sizes (compression)
I'm using the following code to upsample flac 16/44 files:
cd %~dp0
mkdir converted2
FOR %%A IN (%*) DO sox -v0.995 -V3 %%A
17 matches
Mail list logo
