I believe if you have your system set up properly, and are making full
utilization of the information available - 16/44.1 or 24/96 - you will
be happy with either. I am now there. I dont cringe at 16/44.1. I dont
drool over 24/96. My opinion is, if you are hearing a LARGE difference
in 24/96 -
I'll drown here shortly but I'll wade in.
Resolution is sample bits (up and down) and time is on the sample
frequency line (left to right.) In practice these have no effect on
volume.
Accuracy then is the combination of both resolution and frequency.
Back in the days of half-speed masters,
pski;600710 Wrote:
In the full digital world (praise be to Bop 'Til You Drop,). . .
Heh. It's a kick to hang out where someone can write that and not feel
it necessary to explain.
I think I'll go listen to a little vintage Ry now.
R.
--
RonM
Like others I've not heard the recording.
What everyone knows but doesn't say is that the original recording and
how it is mastered are far more important than the format. I'd much
rather listen to a good recording encoded into 256k VBR MP3 than a poor
recording on SACD. The recording is so much
To answer the original question, this recording has a peak way way below
0db. It's wasting digital dynamic range.
If you were to compare this recording, with these levels, via hi-rez
and 16-bit playback it would put 16-bit in an unrealistic and
unnecessarily bad light. I don't want to be a
I spent some (too much!) time downloading the Bach tracks from lessloss,
and was surprised on several fronts:
- The 2496 audio was in .wav format. What?? Who in the right mind does
not offer hi-res audio in an uncompressed lossless format like flac?
- The loudness level for the tracks is
Henry66;596880 Wrote:
Interesting. Would it not have made more sense, when increasing the
number of bits, to stick to a dynamic range of 96dB and increase the
resolution of each bit? That would be about 4dB of dynamic range for 24
bits, 3dB for 32 bits, etc.
Why did they choose the
Phil Leigh;596626 Wrote:
Not quite sure where you get that from, each bit is worth approx 6 dB...
(and in practice, ADC's and DAC's can only do 20-21 bits anyway!
10dB is a factor of 10. 20dB is 100. 23dB is actually as close to a
ratio of 200 as you can get with whole numbers.
You perhaps
Peter Galbavy;596801 Wrote:
10dB is a factor of 10. 20dB is 100. 23dB is actually as close to a
ratio of 200 as you can get with whole numbers.
You perhaps mean 6db of SPL is a factor of 2 in loudness terms ?
Different thing here.
No. In digital recording/playback, each bit is worth just
Henry66;596500 Wrote:
ReplayGain marked Drums Duet 2 with a track gain of +23dB !
Now that is quiet.
Anyways, ReplayGain is your friend. I cannot live without it,
especially now that I have discovered MusicIP. Maybe I am not an
audiophile, but I like my music to sound very good, and I
Erm, I hate to be the bearer of suspicion but 23dB is 8 bits. 24 bits -
8 bits = 16 bits. They may be selling you 24 bit music but only using
the bottom 16 bits
--
Peter Galbavy
Peter Galbavy's Profile:
Peter Galbavy;596602 Wrote:
Erm, I hate to be the bearer of suspicion but 23dB is 8 bits. 24 bits -
8 bits = 16 bits. They may be selling you 24 bit music but only using
the bottom 16 bits
Not quite sure where you get that from, each bit is worth approx 6
dB... (and in practice, ADC's
and the stuffs they are trying to peddle from lessloss.com to know who
they are. As the old saying goes: Salesmanship is the art of making you
laugh while ripping you off blind. Be afraid...very afraid!
--
empty99
SB3-Benchmark DAC1HDR-Pass X250-12g Romex-BW N802
magiccarpetride;596419 Wrote:
Or, maybe it is that I'm lost for the ultra rarefied and refined world
of super-human esoteric high end of audiophilia?
While it's a fun hobby, the letdowns are huge. Preventative is best by
tempering enthusiasm with a daily dose of reality. There are good
magiccarpetride;596419 Wrote:
So what am I missing? Or, am I missing anything? I've noticed the same
unsubstantiated hoopla with other vendors, such as Chesky Records, for
example. Their much ballyhooed superior recording and mastering
sessions always leave me wanting MORE sound. It all
I'm getting deeply drawn into the so-called high definition digital
format (typically 24 bit/96 kHz), so I'm constantly shopping around for
such material. There seem to be more and more of the high-end virtual
stores getting into the high def game, which excites me to no end.
However, one
I am not familiar with any of the specific recordings you cite but the
common answer to your question is that these recordings are
uncompressed and the typical low levels you experience are to permit
a wide dynamic range. This, of course, requires a low noise system.
Kal Rubinson
Music in the
Excerpt 1 sounds amazing, you can feel the impact of that big piano--
Your tracks are quiet probably because the loudness isn't cranked!
killing all the dynamics, i'd just turn up the volume! -- also is that
a passive preamp?
--
sckramer
Squeezebox Touch - PSaudio DL3 DAC (Cullen level 4
Most tracks produced these days are way too loud. See Loudness Wars:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122114058
http://www.turnmeup.org/
If you haven't done this already, you should apply Replay Gain to all
your tracks. This will
ReplayGain marked Drums Duet 2 with a track gain of +23dB !
Now that is quiet.
Anyways, ReplayGain is your friend. I cannot live without it,
especially now that I have discovered MusicIP. Maybe I am not an
audiophile, but I like my music to sound very good, and I appreciate
being able to listen
20 matches
Mail list logo
