adamdea;578263 Wrote: > If you mean the difference quantitatively- well a 19 bit number will > have 8 times as many possible values as a 16 bit number. The 19 bit > sample will therefore have 8 times more possible values than a 16 bit > sample. People seem to get excited going from SD to HD Tv which seems > to me to be less than an 8 fold increase in pixels (am willing to be > corrected though). > As to whether the ability to play 24 bit files (even up to 19 bit > resolution) makes any difference it all depends on your scale. But in > an audiophile context I would thinks it's huge- cf any possible benefit > from different cables etc. And what's more it actually makes sense, > which is comforting.
No - aaaargh - start again :-) Your TV analogy doesn't apply at all. Twice the pixel density = four times the file fize = 4x information. Bit depth increase from 16 to 24 = file size goes up by 50% because each number (sample) being stored is +50% more precise. The number of possible values only affects the PRECISION of each sample. It doesn't alter the amount of information, just its accuracy. The only way in which all bits are equal is that each bit gives you 6dB of Dynamic Range. When there loud stuff going on you simply can't hear the loss of the really quiet stuff. On classical music with protracted passages at -30dB... you might. The other place to look is in the reverb tails at the very end of tracks. Of course it's much MUCH easier for us to hear loud things... and very hard for us to hear quiet things happening at the same time as loud things. This is part of the reason why MP3 compression works at all. It also explains why 13-bit radio was considered state of the art (better than any available tape machine!) in the 70's and why some fairly serious test have shown that you have to reduce bit-depth to about 10 before MOST people hear a definite degradation in sound quality. ...and why Philips thought 14-bit DACs on early CD players were a good idea... 10 bits would equate to 60dB SNR which is not great - but it's about on par with good non-Dolby cassette playback... So no, the difference between 16 and 24 (21) bit playback is not huge by any way you want to measure it. The real benefits of "24-bit" are: 1) greater headroom and more accurate DSP in recording / mastering = less distortion/noise - and these benefits are mostly retained after dithering down to 16-bit - if done properly. 2) the most non-linear bits are the lowest ones and they are further away from audible music in 24-bit DAC's than in 16-bit DAC's 3) A theroretically lower absolute noise floor, but as I've explained, in practice this compromised to some extent by the ADC's and other upstream equipment inthe recording chain. Probbly still worthwhile though Really it's item 1 that lets 24-bit -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker & Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82050 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
