IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Why 24bit/48kHz/96kHz/, If 16bit/44.1kHz is good enough?
William
post Dec 29 2005, 13:45
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 288
Joined: 8-January 02
Member No.: 959



Yes, I have searched the forum.
Yes, maybe I am dumb.

But it seems I cannot find the answer.

Why do we need 24bit/48kHz/96kHz/192kHz if 16bit/44.1kHz is good enough? Are there any situations that 16bit/44.1kHz simply cannot satisfy? In other words, is there any real need for the higher bit depth and sampling rate?

Thanks for answering.

This post has been edited by William: Dec 29 2005, 13:47
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Qjimbo
post Jan 9 2006, 00:20
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 8-November 05
Member No.: 25642



Ok, back to the original question of the thread. This is what I'd always thought was the reason for needing higher samplerates. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this.

Firstly as humans, we can all hear up to roughly 22050Hz, and as nyquist worked out, to record all this this frequency and all the ones below it, you have to take a number of samples per second which is double that, so we get to 44100Hz aka 44.1Khz

However if you do this, although it might seem fine, the higher frequencies have less deatail the further up you go. A 22050Hz sound will only get an on and off point, but none of the smoothness of the curve, so it will be a triangle wave. Not to mention aliasing, which might make it capture a half on and half off point.

Now I've been told that this isn't correct, but from everything I've read online it seems to be.

There's also the more debatable issue that higher frequencies add to the warmth of the sound, even though they're inaudible on a concious level. Hence the term analog warmth, where valves would add random high frequencies to the audio.

Anyway thats just some of the stuff floating around in my mind I don't want another TOS 8 violation >_<
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lyx
post Jan 9 2006, 16:17
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 3353
Joined: 6-July 03
From: Sachsen (DE)
Member No.: 7609



QUOTE (Qjimbo @ Jan 9 2006, 12:20 AM)
Firstly as humans, we can all hear up to roughly 22050Hz...
*

The majority of people can NOT hear that high. Most are well below 20KHz, unless you turn up the volume to levels which will certainly damage your hearing.

This thread will end at the same conclusion as every other thread of this kind: for listening, 44KHz/16bits is sufficient and going higher has no benefit(for listening). Thus, the only advantage which media like DVD-A etc will bring is multichannel-support, storage-space for video, etc.

- Lyx


--------------------
I am arrogant and I can afford it because I deliver.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Woodinville
post Jan 10 2006, 00:38
Post #4





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



QUOTE (Lyx @ Jan 9 2006, 07:17 AM)
This thread will end at the same conclusion as every other thread of this kind: for listening, 44KHz/16bits is sufficient and going higher has no benefit(for listening). Thus, the only advantage which media like DVD-A etc will bring is multichannel-support, storage-space for video, etc.

- Lyx
*


Well, for some very, very limited sets of circumstances, one might imagine that 120dB might be required, i.e. a young person with good hearing in the quietest room in the world, listening to a very loud orchestra with lots of percussion, miked pretty close, and wanting to hear the crowd rustle and air conditioning sounds between movements. This would also require quite an extraordinary playback system, indeed. Such playback systems ARE possible, but extremely rare.

But for most (if not all) living rooms, and most people with normal hearing, yes, I think it's pretty much sufficient.

N.B. Before somebody gets nasty and screams TOS (Look, I'm tired of the audio-woo contingent, too, but not every surprising claim is audio woo.), I'm simply stating something that can be observed from Fletcher's zero-loudness curves.

It would be an extraordinary room and system, but both are possible, with effort and cost, and with a young person who doesn't listen to rock to listen.


--------------------
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Garf
post Jan 10 2006, 12:42
Post #5


Server Admin


Group: Admin
Posts: 4883
Joined: 24-September 01
Member No.: 13



QUOTE (Woodinville @ Jan 10 2006, 01:38 AM)
Well, for some very, very limited sets of circumstances, one might imagine that 120dB might be required, i.e. a young person with good hearing in the quietest room in the world, listening to a very loud orchestra with lots of percussion, miked pretty close, and wanting to hear the crowd rustle and air conditioning sounds between movements. 
[...]
It would be an extraordinary room and system, but both are possible, with effort and cost, and with a young person who doesn't listen to rock to listen.
*


Would you agree with my argument that prolonged exposure to such a large loudness variation (which means necessarily very loud levels at the loudest peaks) would eventually cause hearing damage, thereby making itself useless?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Woodinville
post Jan 10 2006, 23:41
Post #6





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



QUOTE (Garf @ Jan 10 2006, 03:42 AM)
QUOTE (Woodinville @ Jan 10 2006, 01:38 AM)
Well, for some very, very limited sets of circumstances, one might imagine that 120dB might be required, i.e. a young person with good hearing in the quietest room in the world, listening to a very loud orchestra with lots of percussion, miked pretty close, and wanting to hear the crowd rustle and air conditioning sounds between movements.
[...]
It would be an extraordinary room and system, but both are possible, with effort and cost, and with a young person who doesn't listen to rock to listen.
*


Would you agree with my argument that prolonged exposure to such a large loudness variation (which means necessarily very loud levels at the loudest peaks) would eventually cause hearing damage, thereby making itself useless?
*



It depends on the actual duration of the loud parts, but in general, I agree that listening over a short-term or long-term mean of 85dB SPL is bad news.

On the other hand, means to measure exposure are still rather primitive, and even those of us who prefer to be in quiet surroundings routinely see peaks well above that. Consider applause, but we don't all go deaf from it.


--------------------
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- William   Why 24bit/48kHz/96kHz/   Dec 29 2005, 13:45
- - Lyx   QUOTE (William @ Dec 29 2005, 01:45 PM)Why do...   Dec 29 2005, 13:53
|- - krabapple   QUOTE (Lyx @ Dec 29 2005, 07:53 AM)QUOTE (Wil...   Jan 6 2006, 20:04
- - William   I heard someone saying that increasing the samplin...   Dec 29 2005, 14:09
|- - Garf   QUOTE (William @ Dec 29 2005, 03:09 PM)I hear...   Dec 29 2005, 14:13
|- - William   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 29 2005, 01:13 PM)Normally,...   Dec 29 2005, 14:22
|- - Garf   QUOTE (William @ Dec 29 2005, 03:22 PM)Would ...   Dec 29 2005, 14:45
- - bizangoin   I totally agree with you all. Increasing sample ra...   Dec 29 2005, 14:32
- - William   I am sorry. Thanks.   Dec 29 2005, 14:59
- - singaiya   QUOTE (William @ Dec 29 2005, 04:45 AM)Why do...   Dec 29 2005, 18:44
|- - bug80   QUOTE (singaiya @ Dec 29 2005, 07:44 PM)I hav...   Dec 29 2005, 22:16
- - rosshmusic   I agree that it makes no difference to end users.....   Dec 29 2005, 21:32
|- - Garf   QUOTE (rosshmusic @ Dec 29 2005, 10:32 PM)I a...   Dec 29 2005, 21:46
|- - listen   I had a thread here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/...   Dec 29 2005, 22:24
|- - rosshmusic   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 29 2005, 04:46 PM)QUOTE (ro...   Dec 29 2005, 22:55
||- - Garf   QUOTE (rosshmusic @ Dec 29 2005, 11:55 PM)htt...   Dec 29 2005, 23:58
||- - rosshmusic   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 29 2005, 06:58 PM)QUOTE (ro...   Dec 30 2005, 02:59
||- - bug80   QUOTE (rosshmusic @ Dec 30 2005, 03:59 AM)whe...   Dec 30 2005, 13:54
|- - krabapple   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 29 2005, 03:46 PM)QUOTE (ro...   Jan 6 2006, 20:10
- - Tool462   ok, i'm a newb so don't give me some slack...   Dec 29 2005, 22:50
|- - Garf   QUOTE (Tool462 @ Dec 29 2005, 11:50 PM)ok, i...   Dec 30 2005, 00:01
- - Revliskciuq   I have to step out and disagree that there is no a...   Dec 30 2005, 03:11
|- - Garf   QUOTE (Revliskciuq @ Dec 30 2005, 04:11 AM)I ...   Dec 30 2005, 13:59
||- - jmvalin   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 30 2005, 09:59 PM)Practise ...   Dec 31 2005, 16:22
||- - Garf   QUOTE (jmvalin @ Dec 31 2005, 05:22 PM)Actual...   Dec 31 2005, 16:31
||- - WmAx   QUOTE (jmvalin @ Dec 31 2005, 11:22 AM)but I...   Dec 31 2005, 16:33
||- - Shade[ST]   QUOTE (WmAx @ Dec 31 2005, 09:33 AM)Just to p...   Dec 31 2005, 19:25
||- - WmAx   QUOTE (Shade[ST),Dec 31 2005, 02:25 PM]QUOTE ...   Dec 31 2005, 20:52
||- - enry2k   First: What about ensuring extremely controlled li...   Jan 6 2006, 01:08
||- - Pio2001   QUOTE (William @ Dec 30 2005, 05:03 AM)And wh...   Jan 6 2006, 06:48
||- - krabapple   QUOTE (enry2k @ Jan 5 2006, 07:08 PM)First: W...   Jan 6 2006, 20:27
||- - enry2k   Thank you for quoting the thread, it is really i...   Jan 8 2006, 20:36
|- - crimsontide   QUOTE (Revliskciuq @ Dec 29 2005, 08:11 PM)I ...   Mar 13 2006, 14:36
|- - Cyaneyes   QUOTE (crimsontide @ Mar 13 2006, 08:36 AM)I ...   Mar 13 2006, 15:55
||- - crimsontide   QUOTE (Cyaneyes @ Mar 13 2006, 08:55 AM)QUOTE...   Mar 13 2006, 16:49
|- - Societal Eclipse   QUOTE (crimsontide @ Mar 13 2006, 09:36 AM)An...   Mar 13 2006, 17:40
- - William   OK, so here are some more technical questions I fo...   Dec 30 2005, 04:03
|- - probedb   QUOTE (William @ Dec 30 2005, 04:03 AM)1) The...   Jan 5 2006, 14:28
- - boombaard   so, on a slightly different note, would the 24/96 ...   Dec 30 2005, 14:24
|- - Garf   QUOTE (boombaard @ Dec 30 2005, 03:24 PM)so, ...   Dec 30 2005, 14:25
|- - boombaard   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 30 2005, 02:25 PM)QUOTE (bo...   Dec 30 2005, 14:37
|- - Garf   QUOTE (boombaard @ Dec 30 2005, 03:37 PM)how ...   Dec 30 2005, 15:13
||- - boombaard   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 30 2005, 03:13 PM)QUOTE (bo...   Dec 30 2005, 15:46
||- - jussi   well, and what about the HDCD (20bit) technology? ...   Dec 30 2005, 15:52
|||- - Garf   QUOTE (jussi @ Dec 30 2005, 04:52 PM)well, an...   Dec 30 2005, 16:00
||- - Garf   QUOTE (boombaard @ Dec 30 2005, 04:46 PM)QUOT...   Dec 30 2005, 15:56
|- - Crissaegrim   Definitive answer... Artists record at as high as ...   Dec 30 2005, 17:02
|- - bug80   QUOTE (Crissaegrim @ Dec 30 2005, 06:02 PM)De...   Dec 30 2005, 17:09
- - William   Well, it sounds like these 24bits / whatever kHz a...   Dec 30 2005, 15:54
- - Wintershade   Sorry for popping in like that, but here's my ...   Dec 30 2005, 16:04
|- - bug80   QUOTE (Wintershade @ Dec 30 2005, 05:04 PM)So...   Dec 30 2005, 16:25
||- - Wintershade   QUOTE (bug80 @ Dec 30 2005, 05:25 PM)Do you h...   Jan 2 2006, 12:45
|- - krabapple   QUOTE (Wintershade @ Dec 30 2005, 10:04 AM)So...   Jan 6 2006, 20:16
- - Axon   Some DSP algorithms may benefit from a high sampli...   Dec 30 2005, 19:39
- - Lyx   Regarding clipping and samplerate: according to a ...   Dec 30 2005, 19:58
|- - bug80   QUOTE (Lyx @ Dec 30 2005, 08:58 PM)Regarding ...   Dec 31 2005, 12:23
|- - Garf   QUOTE (Lyx @ Dec 30 2005, 08:58 PM)As you kno...   Dec 31 2005, 14:26
- - Raptus   >16bit would be necessary if someone wanted to ...   Dec 30 2005, 20:07
- - NoXFeR   On a sidenote; recorders may want higher frequenci...   Dec 31 2005, 00:05
|- - bug80   QUOTE (NoXFeR @ Dec 31 2005, 01:05 AM)On a si...   Dec 31 2005, 12:16
|- - NoXFeR   QUOTE (bug80 @ Dec 31 2005, 12:16 PM)QUOTE (N...   Dec 31 2005, 15:18
|- - WmAx   QUOTE (NoXFeR @ Dec 31 2005, 10:18 AM)The poi...   Dec 31 2005, 15:29
- - Lyx   One more reason to instead simply use proper level...   Dec 31 2005, 12:33
|- - bug80   QUOTE (Lyx @ Dec 31 2005, 01:33 PM)One more r...   Dec 31 2005, 13:33
|- - Garf   QUOTE (bug80 @ Dec 31 2005, 02:33 PM)QUOTE (L...   Dec 31 2005, 14:20
|- - bug80   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 31 2005, 03:20 PM)QUOTE (bu...   Dec 31 2005, 14:23
|- - Garf   QUOTE (bug80 @ Dec 31 2005, 03:23 PM)QUOTE (G...   Dec 31 2005, 14:31
- - kwwong   The main reason why sampling rates > 44.1Khz is...   Dec 31 2005, 14:30
|- - Garf   QUOTE (kwwong @ Dec 31 2005, 03:30 PM)The mai...   Dec 31 2005, 14:41
||- - kwwong   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 31 2005, 07:41 AM)QUOTE (kw...   Jan 1 2006, 04:30
||- - kwwong   QUOTE (kwwong @ Dec 31 2005, 09:30 PM)QUOTE (...   Jan 1 2006, 04:39
|- - WmAx   QUOTE (kwwong @ Dec 31 2005, 09:30 AM)As for ...   Dec 31 2005, 15:39
- - Garf   Another thing to consider is that with proper dith...   Dec 31 2005, 14:51
|- - marcan   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 31 2005, 05:51 AM)Another t...   Jan 5 2006, 15:57
|- - enry2k   QUOTE (marcan @ Jan 5 2006, 06:57 AM)QUOTE (G...   Jan 8 2006, 21:28
|- - Garf   QUOTE (marcan @ Jan 5 2006, 04:57 PM)QUOTE (G...   Jan 10 2006, 12:33
- - Garf   I think what he's trying to say is this: If y...   Dec 31 2005, 15:31
- - Lyx   I think he means playing 192khz sample at 44khz WI...   Dec 31 2005, 15:31
- - ivalladt   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 29 2005, 03:13 PM)The quest...   Dec 31 2005, 19:13
- - dekkersj   QUOTE (Garf @ Dec 31 2005, 02:51 PM)Another t...   Jan 2 2006, 15:41
- - Qjimbo   Ok, back to the original question of the thread. T...   Jan 9 2006, 00:20
|- - Lyx   QUOTE (Qjimbo @ Jan 9 2006, 12:20 AM)Firstly ...   Jan 9 2006, 16:17
|- - marcan   QUOTE (Lyx @ Jan 9 2006, 07:17 AM)QUOTE (Qjim...   Jan 9 2006, 17:59
|- - Woodinville   QUOTE (Lyx @ Jan 9 2006, 07:17 AM)This thread...   Jan 10 2006, 00:38
|- - Garf   QUOTE (Woodinville @ Jan 10 2006, 01:38 AM)We...   Jan 10 2006, 12:42
|- - Woodinville   QUOTE (Garf @ Jan 10 2006, 03:42 AM)QUOTE (Wo...   Jan 10 2006, 23:41
- - CSMR   Somehow this question brings out all the know-alls...   Jan 9 2006, 01:52
- - AndyH-ha   The Sampling Theorem says that signals containing ...   Jan 9 2006, 08:28
|- - bug80   QUOTE (AndyH-ha @ Jan 9 2006, 09:28 AM)T...   Jan 9 2006, 10:19
|- - Woodinville   QUOTE (AndyH-ha @ Jan 8 2006, 11:28 PM)T...   Jan 10 2006, 00:41
- - AndyH-ha   My immediately available source is Principles of D...   Jan 9 2006, 18:02
|- - SebastianG   QUOTE (AndyH-ha @ Jan 9 2006, 06:02 PM)o...   Jan 9 2006, 18:30
- - stephanV   @crimsontide: You can never prove a negative. The...   Mar 13 2006, 17:49
|- - crimsontide   QUOTE (stephanV @ Mar 13 2006, 10:49 AM)@crim...   Mar 13 2006, 18:32
- - harlekeyn   16bit means 2^16 = 65536 possible values for each ...   Mar 19 2006, 06:58
|- - Pio2001   QUOTE (harlekeyn @ Mar 19 2006, 07:58 AM)If y...   Mar 19 2006, 22:07
|- - crimsontide   Well I agree with what Tristan said For example ...   Mar 20 2006, 11:03
|- - Woodinville   QUOTE (crimsontide @ Mar 20 2006, 02:03 AM)I ...   Mar 20 2006, 21:19
- - harlekeyn   WHEN COMPARING digital audio to digital photograph...   Apr 4 2006, 16:48
- - benski   With somewhat expensive studio equipment (RME Hamm...   Apr 4 2006, 16:56
5 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 


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: 1st August 2014 - 03:45