[TOS #8,#12] From: ...no point to distributing music in 24 bit/192 kHz, From Topic ID: 93853 Options

[forart.eu]

Just a note: it has been scientifically proven that sounds are not perceived only through ears...

Anyway, in our case, bit depth is *mutch* more important than frequency IMHO.

This post has been edited by forart.eu: Mar 15 2012, 08:19

[forart.eu]

Do you remember the 10th of December 2009? It was the day you joined the wrong forum.

For your knowledge, i joined this forum before you on 2nd October 2001 mate.

Seriously, it's pretty trivial to ABX the feeling of the floor vibrating beneath your feet as you play a deep bass line.

It was just an example.

So you're substantially claiming that non-ABXable lossy-encoded sound is equal to a lossless one ?

If true, than what's the meaning of lossless encoders ?


BTW - once again - my position is that we don't need more Hz, but we need more bits !



This post has been edited by forart.eu: Mar 15 2012, 14:37

[SebastianG]

BTW - once again - my position is that we don't need more Hz, but we need more bits !
http://www.joelstrait.com/blog/2009/10/12/..._per_sample.png

I don't see how these pictures support your position. As Monty said already in his article: Pictures can be deceiving. You seem to lack an understanding of how and why dithering works. Go back to Monty's article and read it again.

This post has been edited by db1989: Mar 15 2012, 20:32

Reason for edit: demoting image to link