IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

18 Pages V  « < 16 17 18  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Why 24bit/48kHz/96kHz/, If 16bit/44.1kHz is good enough?
Woodinville
post Apr 9 2007, 18:22
Post #426





Group: Members
Posts: 1402
Joined: 9-January 05
From: JJ's office.
Member No.: 18957



QUOTE (Madman2003 @ Apr 8 2007, 03:10) *
QUOTE (mdmuir @ Apr 8 2007, 10:00) *

"The last bit I really noticed is that when passing the pure digital source through a tube line amp, (didn't have the luxury to try a stand-alone tube D/A where I did this) it predictably smoothed things a bit more, and made the Red-Book CD at least listenable. The up-sampled 24/96 via tape sounded absolutely glorious through tubes on playback."

Which from my (admitted) laymens knowledge means, you prefer the sound of higher harmonic distortion.


Specifically, even order harmonics. Only tube amps have this. Not a 100% sure, so don't take this as a fact.


Depends on the kind of tube amp. Single ended amps have primarily 2nd order, with all orders present. Push-pull amps have all even-order harmonics very nearly cancelled, it's almost all odd-order distortions.
LP's have very strong assymetric (i.e. even order and odd order both) nonlinearities.


--------------------
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
nrand
post May 1 2008, 12:20
Post #427





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 28-March 08
Member No.: 52370



[/quote]
Most studios know that recording at > 44.1 kHz is pretty useless, unless it is a recording for DVD-A or SACD purposes. All studios I know record simply at 44.1 kHz / 24 bit. There are no artists that I know of that record at 192 kHz to give the end user a fuzzy feeling smile.gif
[/quote]

OK so with my home recording gear limitations I basically have two options:
44.1/16 bit or 48/24 bit
Which would you opt for and why?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post May 1 2008, 12:24
Post #428





Group: Members
Posts: 3305
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



QUOTE (nrand @ May 1 2008, 07:20) *
QUOTE

Most studios know that recording at > 44.1 kHz is pretty useless, unless it is a recording for DVD-A or SACD purposes. All studios I know record simply at 44.1 kHz / 24 bit. There are no artists that I know of that record at 192 kHz to give the end user a fuzzy feeling smile.gif


OK so with my home recording gear limitations I basically have two options:
44.1/16 bit or 48/24 bit
Which would you opt for and why?

If it is going straight to CD as-is then 44.1/16. If you plan to do any kind of manipulation first then 48/24.

Edit: fixed quites.

This post has been edited by pdq: May 1 2008, 13:59
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post May 1 2008, 17:50
Post #429





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



The video world works at 48kHz.

If you were just planning on dealing with CDDA, it would be better to work at 44.1/24 than 48/24 (EDIT: if given the option), no?

This post has been edited by greynol: May 1 2008, 18:05


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
andrew & david
post May 2 2008, 15:02
Post #430





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 29-April 08
Member No.: 53143



Linn Records offer 24bit 96Khz recordings

http://www.linnrecords.com/linn-help-downl...-downloads.aspx

A lot of concerts on DVD have a 24bit 48 or 96 khz LPCM stereo audio track.

Is this just marketing or maybe when you need to do some post manipulation or processing it degrades the sound less at higher bit rates prior to downsampling.

I have done some AB comparisions with 24/96 vs 16/44.1 and the difference are subtle on certain music and not noticable at all on other music.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Slipstreem
post May 2 2008, 16:05
Post #431





Group: Members
Posts: 966
Joined: 7-July 06
Member No.: 32660



Was this AB testing or ABX testing? ABX testing eliminates the placebo effect. AB testing doesn't. smile.gif

Cheers, Slipstreem. cool.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
andrew & david
post May 2 2008, 16:20
Post #432





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 29-April 08
Member No.: 53143



QUOTE (Slipstreem @ May 2 2008, 16:05) *
Was this AB testing or ABX testing? ABX testing eliminates the placebo effect. AB testing doesn't. smile.gif

Cheers, Slipstreem. cool.gif


This was ABX, with 2 people accessing the differences and a 3rd changing source.

Was using a wonderfull recording on David Gilmore Live DVD which has a 24/96 LPCM stereo of the concert. Ripped from the DVD and converted to 16/44.1 using Cakewalk and left as 24/96. It's one of the best recordings i have ever heard, highly recomended. Started me off in the interest of looking for LPCM music off DVD's.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Slipstreem
post May 2 2008, 16:35
Post #433





Group: Members
Posts: 966
Joined: 7-July 06
Member No.: 32660



Fair enough. I guess that the point of my post was to remind you to state clearly when ABX testing has been carried out in preference to AB testing. This forum can be a foreboding place to a newcomer so I thought I'd nudge you politely before any less forgiving members 'stuck the boot in', so to speak. We like to deal in certifiable facts. wink.gif

Cheers, Slipstreem. cool.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post May 2 2008, 17:56
Post #434





Group: Members
Posts: 3305
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



QUOTE (andrew & david @ May 2 2008, 11:20) *
QUOTE (Slipstreem @ May 2 2008, 16:05) *

Was this AB testing or ABX testing? ABX testing eliminates the placebo effect. AB testing doesn't. smile.gif

Cheers, Slipstreem. cool.gif


This was ABX, with 2 people accessing the differences and a 3rd changing source.

You also need to provide numerical results to show that it is statistically significant.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
KikeG
post May 2 2008, 22:43
Post #435


WinABX developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1578
Joined: 1-October 01
Member No.: 137



QUOTE (pdq @ May 2 2008, 17:56) *
QUOTE (andrew & david @ May 2 2008, 11:20) *

QUOTE (Slipstreem @ May 2 2008, 16:05) *

Was this AB testing or ABX testing? ABX testing eliminates the placebo effect. AB testing doesn't. smile.gif

Cheers, Slipstreem. cool.gif


This was ABX, with 2 people accessing the differences and a 3rd changing source.

You also need to provide numerical results to show that it is statistically significant.

Also, were the sources level-matched within 0.1 dB? And properly time-aligned?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

18 Pages V  « < 16 17 18
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th April 2014 - 00:11