IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Downconverting for iPod: should I use the maximal 24/48 or just 16/44?, [was "24bit 96khz conversion, still good?"]
adlai
post Oct 25 2012, 17:35
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 29-November 03
Member No.: 10090



So ipods cannot play 24 bit 96khz files.

But they can play 24 bit 48khz files.

Alternately, you could just stick with the 16bit 44khz cd file.

So what would be better, dither down to 24bit/48khz, or stick with the original 16 bil 44khz?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Oct 25 2012, 17:37
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 1920
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



QUOTE (adlai @ Oct 25 2012, 18:35) *
or stick with the original 16 bil 44khz?


If it was originally at 16/44.1, then why touch it?


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Oct 25 2012, 17:42
Post #3





Group: Developer
Posts: 3412
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



What is the source of these 24/96 files? DVD? Vinyl rip?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nessuno
post Oct 25 2012, 17:55
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 423
Joined: 16-December 10
From: Palermo
Member No.: 86562



QUOTE (adlai @ Oct 25 2012, 18:35) *
So ipods cannot play 24 bit 96khz files.

I'm not sure, but there are good chances it can, especially newer devices, via digital output to an external DAC.


--------------------
... I live by long distance.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adlai
post Oct 25 2012, 17:58
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 29-November 03
Member No.: 10090



QUOTE (lvqcl @ Oct 25 2012, 09:42) *
What is the source of these 24/96 files? DVD? Vinyl rip?


vinyl rip.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adlai
post Oct 25 2012, 18:13
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 29-November 03
Member No.: 10090



QUOTE (Nessuno @ Oct 25 2012, 09:55) *
QUOTE (adlai @ Oct 25 2012, 18:35) *
So ipods cannot play 24 bit 96khz files.

I'm not sure, but there are good chances it can, especially newer devices, via digital output to an external DAC.


it can't. i just tried.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adlai
post Oct 25 2012, 18:15
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 29-November 03
Member No.: 10090



QUOTE (Porcus @ Oct 25 2012, 09:37) *
QUOTE (adlai @ Oct 25 2012, 18:35) *
or stick with the original 16 bil 44khz?


If it was originally at 16/44.1, then why touch it?


the optiosn are:

take 24bit/96hz file and downconvert to 48hz file

or

use 16 bit 44hz file.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Oct 25 2012, 18:22
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 5047
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



I don't know if new iPods resample or not. If they do use 44.1k. If not it doesn't matter.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adlai
post Oct 25 2012, 18:22
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 29-November 03
Member No.: 10090



QUOTE (saratoga @ Oct 25 2012, 10:22) *
I don't know if new iPods resample or not. If they do use 44.1k. If not it doesn't matter.


they can play 48hz files. just not 96hz
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Oct 25 2012, 18:24
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 3424
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



So you're asking which is better, the CD version or the vinly version? It depends on the mastering, for one thing. If both came from the same master then the CD should be more accurate, but some people prefer the added noise and distortion of vinyl.

In any case, if the 24/96 from vinyl is downsampled to 24/48, or 16/48, or 16/44.1 should make no audible difference.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Oct 25 2012, 18:46
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 5047
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (adlai @ Oct 25 2012, 13:22) *
QUOTE (saratoga @ Oct 25 2012, 10:22) *
I don't know if new iPods resample or not. If they do use 44.1k. If not it doesn't matter.


they can play 48hz files. just not 96hz


I know they can play 48k. What I mean was that I did not know if they resample to 44.1k. If they do, then do not use 48k.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adlai
post Oct 25 2012, 18:53
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 29-November 03
Member No.: 10090



QUOTE (pdq @ Oct 25 2012, 10:24) *
So you're asking which is better, the CD version or the vinly version? It depends on the mastering, for one thing. If both came from the same master then the CD should be more accurate, but some people prefer the added noise and distortion of vinyl.

In any case, if the 24/96 from vinyl is downsampled to 24/48, or 16/48, or 16/44.1 should make no audible difference.


they do sound different though. The vinyl seems lighter, whiel the cd is slightly mroe muffled, though it seems to not have some of the audible quirks of the vinyl
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DVDdoug
post Oct 25 2012, 19:17
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 2638
Joined: 24-August 07
From: Silicon Valley
Member No.: 46454



I'd use whatever format you normaly use... Since I've got MP3s on my iPod, if it was me I'd use MP3.

QUOTE
...they do sound different though. The vinyl seems lighter, whiel the cd is slightly mroe muffled, though it seems to not have some of the audible quirks of the vinyl
Choose the one that sounds best to your ear. If you choose the 24/96 file, downconvert it to whatever format you like. As PDQ said, you shouldn't hear any difference as long as you keep it at 16/44.1 or above. Or, put both versins on your iPod if you like!



IMO - 24/96 is total overkill, especially when the original is inferior antique analog vinyl! wink.gif Some people prefer the sound of vinyl, or you might just prefer the different vinyl mastering on some recordings. But, vinyl can't compete with digital when it comes to technical performance such as noise, distortion, and frequency response.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Oct 26 2012, 12:56
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 3968
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (adlai @ Oct 25 2012, 13:53) *
QUOTE (pdq @ Oct 25 2012, 10:24) *
So you're asking which is better, the CD version or the vinly version? It depends on the mastering, for one thing. If both came from the same master then the CD should be more accurate, but some people prefer the added noise and distortion of vinyl.

In any case, if the 24/96 from vinyl is downsampled to 24/48, or 16/48, or 16/44.1 should make no audible difference.


they do sound different though. The vinyl seems lighter, whiel the cd is slightly mroe muffled, though it seems to not have some of the audible quirks of the vinyl


One of the problems with this discussion is that vinyl sounds different from vinyl, with the choice of cartridge and some other installation details being important variables.

Back in the days when vinyl was all we had, some of us did some ABXing to see what it took for different cartridges to be indistinguishable in a close comparison:

http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_phca.htm

There was a fair amount of careful work that was done to make the comparison as close as possible. For example one of the important variables was adjusting the capacitive loading of some of the MM cartridges for flattest frequency response.

How many people do you know who sit down with a test record, some measuring equipment a pile of capacitors and a soldering iron to adjust this parameter?

This contrasts with CD players where you can just plug and play and have a reasonable expectation of identical or at worst nearly identical sound quality:

http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_cd.htm and

Stereo Review Magazine "Do All CD Players Sound The Same?" Jan 1986
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2Bdecided
post Oct 29 2012, 13:34
Post #15


ReplayGain developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 5180
Joined: 5-November 01
From: Yorkshire, UK
Member No.: 409



The poster has recordings from vinyl in 24/96, and wants to know whether to convert these to 24/48 or 16/44.1. Vinyl vs CD discussions are off topic wink.gif

If your vinyl transfers are peak normalised, it's unlikely you'll hear a difference between 24-bit and 16-bit.

I have no idea if the iPod (or your chosen resampler) behaves better at 48kHz or 44.1kHz. Either is fine with good equipment/resampler, 48kHz is better with poor resampler, whichever the equipment support natively (could be both!) is better for poor equipment.

You haven't mentioned whether you'll be mp3 encoding the result, or loading it up as a lossless file. For mp3 encoding, 24-bit is a better source than (some) 16-bit (but not necessarily audibly so). For mp3 encoding, most encoders are carefully tuned at 44.k1Hz, though 48kHz can work well enough.

So, for mp3 encoding I'd probably go with 24/44.1, while for lossless I would stick with 16/48 or 16/44.1.

I think it spectacularly unlikely that a difference will be audible in any circumstance or comparison, so you might as well do whatever you like, using whatever justification makes you happy. wink.gif

Hope this helps.
David.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Brother John
post Oct 29 2012, 23:04
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 96
Joined: 8-March 05
From: Germany
Member No.: 20465



We’re talking ipod so chances are we’re talking earphones and a casual, noisy listening environment. Doesn’t this make this discussion about possible very minor nuances kind of irrelevant?

I’d spend 5 minutes to google what is more “native” for the ipod – just for the sake of paranoia – and then go for 16/44.1 or 16/48 accordingly.


--------------------
cu
Brother John
------
http://brother-john.net/tagz/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Oct 30 2012, 14:53
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 3968
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (Brother John @ Oct 29 2012, 18:04) *
We’re talking ipod so chances are we’re talking earphones and a casual, noisy listening environment. Doesn’t this make this discussion about possible very minor nuances kind of irrelevant?

I’d spend 5 minutes to google what is more “native” for the ipod – just for the sake of paranoia – and then go for 16/44.1 or 16/48 accordingly.


..especially when the minor nuances are sitting behind a ton of evidence saying that they don't matter, even under ideal conditions, because the limit to dynamic range in 16 bit recordings is set when someone decides to record real world music in a real world room with a real world microphone.

Anybody who wants to taste-test good modern resamplers or good modern 16 bit digital players needs a TOS 8 wake up call, IMO. ;-)

This post has been edited by Arnold B. Krueger: Oct 30 2012, 14:54
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 25th October 2014 - 02:34