IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!
- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.
- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.
- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

[TOS #8,#12] From: ...no point to distributing music in 24 bit/192 kHz, From Topic ID: 93853
forart.eu
post Mar 15 2012, 08:17
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 74
Joined: 10-December 09
From: italy
Member No.: 75798



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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
forart.eu
post Mar 15 2012, 14:25
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 74
Joined: 10-December 09
From: italy
Member No.: 75798



QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Mar 15 2012, 10:46) *
Do you remember the 10th of December 2009? It was the day you joined the wrong forum. wink.gif

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

QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Mar 15 2012, 10:46) *
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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
skamp
post Mar 15 2012, 15:18
Post #3





Group: Developer
Posts: 1454
Joined: 4-May 04
From: France
Member No.: 13875



QUOTE (forart.eu @ Mar 15 2012, 14:25) *
For your knowledge, i joined this forum before you on 2nd October 2001 mate. huh.gif

Explain.

QUOTE (forart.eu @ Mar 15 2012, 14:25) *
If true, than what's the meaning of lossless encoders ?

Lossless encoders have other applications besides playback, like transcoding.

QUOTE (forart.eu @ Mar 15 2012, 14:25) *
BTW - once again - my position is that we don't need more Hz, but we need more bits !

I'm no engineer, but as I understand it: because of the way digital audio works, 1 bit adds 6dB to the scale, giving you twice the loudness. That's no matter how many bits you have, 16, 24 or 32, the value will always be the same. Increasing the number of bits will not make for a finer scale (more detail), but a bigger scale (more values, leaving original values intact). 1 bit will still be +6dB. Without dithering, 16 bits gives you 96dB to play with, 24 gives you 144, and 32 gives you a whopping 192dB. Suffice to say, that's a stupidly large scale, that would "allow" you to record sounds from the absolute threshold of hearing (0dB) to way above the threshold of pain (120-140dB if I'm not mistaken?).

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong (and if I am, please explain like you would to a 10 year old).


--------------------
See my profile for measurements, tools and recommendations.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Mar 15 2012, 15:46
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 1995
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



QUOTE (skamp @ Mar 15 2012, 15:18) *
Increasing the number of bits will not make for a finer scale (more detail), but a bigger scale (more values, leaving original values intact).


Well, that is not right. You can always use the volume knob to give you a 'bigger scale' in the sense of sound pressure difference between 'full' volume and 'silence'. 1 bit can tell you 'sound on/sound off'. Two bits can give you 4 levels including silence. n bits can give you 2^n levels including silence.

But assume that while you vary the number of bits, you adjust the volume knob so that the largest signal -- all bits to '1' -- gives you the loudest useful output. Any other signal will then be some dB's less than this. Then the 'bigger scale' interpretation is the difference between the smallest *NONZERO* signal and the full volume. This smallest signal is the least-significant bit.

But that also gives you a 'fineness' (resolution): say you have an 8 bit signal, then for any of the first seven you can have *******0 or *******1. The difference between the two, is this smallest-nonzero-signal -- the 'fineness' of the scale. You can add this least-significant bit to every signal except the full volume (and by the 'loudest useful output' assumption, you do not wish to do so for full volume).

If you have so many bits that the 000[etc]0001 signal is at the hearing threshold and 111[etc]1 is the loudest useful, then what? Not only can you feed the listeners the quietest signal (s)he could detect in a dead room, you can also add this signal to anything below full volume. If we assume that there is never a 'negative masking effect' -- a hearing threshold sound is no easier to detect if another louder signal is played simultaneously, than if played in a dead chamber -- then this gives you a scale that is sufficiently fine when you have turned the volume knob up so much that it is sufficiently big. Any volume difference so small that the ADC rounds it off, is also so small that it is inaudible.



(All of this is slightly complicated by positive/negative amplitude. I've written as if everything is positive.)

This post has been edited by Porcus: Mar 15 2012, 15:50


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


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: 28th December 2014 - 04:57