24/192 Music Downloads ...and why they make no sense

[kaushik]

Recently i have played 24bit files via new DAC , the files has some complex instruments ,

I did not like them there is nothing more to hear specially via tripath amp and MS canivals .

, even simple FLACs sounded better

so one word 24bit audio is USELESS for low cost audio chain.

However the DAC is well performer for the price .

 

[gobble]

And the debate continues ...

From http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Unfortunately, there is no point to distributing music in 24-bit/192kHz format. Its playback fidelity is slightly inferior to 16/44.1 or 16/48, and it takes up 6 times the space.

And then ... Does "Mastered for iTunes" matter to music? Ars puts it to the test

Using 16 bits for each sample allows a maximum dynamic range of 96dB. (It's even possible with modern signal processing to accurately record and playback as much as 120dB of dynamic range.) Since the most dynamic modern recording doesn't have a dynamic range beyond 60dB, 16-bit audio accurately captures the full dynamic range of nearly any audio source.

But ...

"It seems to contain more sonic information than the typical iTunes file," Rubin told MTV. "It's much closer to the sound of the CD and it took several weeks of additional experimentation and mastering to reach the final iTunes master."

Now we could compare the original CD master, the file generated by iTunes from that master, and our own "specially mastered for iTunes" version. Subjectively, our tweaks made the track sound better. Much of the "boxiness" was gone, and the song sounded more "alive."

Also some interesting tidbits like ...

"In the early digital delivery days, each mastering engineer experimented around until he found an encoder that he liked," Hull said. "But it always depended on the source material. Different encoders worked differently on jazz as compared to dance music, for instance."

Thankfully sense prevails ... but the writer glosses over it over the course of the article.

British recording engineer Ian Shepard called the entire process of specially mastering audio files for iTunes to sound more like the CD version simple "BS."

Time to start collecting mudpacks for some more mud slinging ... hyeah:

--G0bble

 

[koushikp]

Re: Whither Hi-Rez?

I listen to 24/192 to music. I do not believe in measurements and/or technical jargon, JUST BELIEVE IN WHAT I HEAR. I would say they sound better than 16/44 and 24/96.

saying it over and over again won't make it true

 

[msagar]

If you fuel your journey on the opinions of others, you are going to run out of gas. ? Steve Maraboli

 

[msagar]

koushikp

[QUOTE][/QUOTE]saying it over and over again won't make it true[QUOTE][/QUOTE]

FYI: No WAC please. This thread is a result of multiple threads merger. Read thread from the start.

 

[koushikp]

If you fuel your journey on the opinions of others, you are going to run out of gas. ? Steve Maraboli

I wholeheartedly agree...that's why i like science..its not opinion, just facts...which the article is.. but your comment...that my friend was an opinion...
I suggest you read the article and try to understand it before you need to retaliate to feed your insecurities...

And I apologize for my comment about saying it over and over...didn't realize it resulted from the merger of threads..

 

[msagar]

I do not believe in retaliation.
I strongly believe in posts based upon experiences.
I express only experiences in my posts / comments on this forum.
The articles / links posted by me clearly state they are FYI only.
Facts stated by others are their opinions.

 

[koushikp]

Facts stated by others are their opinions.

Hmmm...I assume you are not a man of science..and if you are..I must explore this comment further about what exactly you mean by this..and sir, absolutely no sarcasm intended in this post, hand on my heart.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

 

[msagar]

Koushik,

My comments are totally related to audio reproduction only.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Merging threads because they are about the same subject might impose some sort of tidiness on things, but it certainly doesn't lower the noise floor! My head is spinning on this one!

Does anybody know what dynamic range they can actually hear, in the real, live situation of their own home with its usual ambient sounds of fans and maybe AC machines, etc etc?

You can find out. Check the Dynamic Range tests: Blind Listening Tests. Probably, even for people with better hearing than mine, the results are quite shocking.

EDIT... Oh, I did post that before. Sorry.

 

[alpha1]

I can hear the wind blowing on Mars.
So what if your science says it is impossible ...

I can hear the difference in Bi-wiring - so what if your science says principle of superposition, and ALL telecom networks in this world are built upon this principle.

I can hear the difference when I color the backside of a CD black, so what if ALL the data CDs have never had problems with light colored backside.

I can hear the difference between a 44.1kHz sampling and 196 kHz sampling, so what if your science says it makes no difference to my ears because I lack the sensors in my ear to notice the high frequency difference.

 

[kumarab]

^^That cracked me up big time:lol:. I, however, as a principle de believe in giving the benefit of doubt to any such claims. Thing is, as we've discussed umpteen times on this topic, the source/mastering matters the most. Those 24/192 may very well come from better recorded/mixed/mastered sources. It's just that people tend to associate these differences to inherent advantages or disadvantages of different sample rates.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

What We Hear

This is yet another link that I picked up here on HFV, so just regurgitating it.

 

[koushikp]

I can hear the wind blowing on Mars.
So what if your science says it is impossible ...

I can hear the difference in Bi-wiring - so what if your science says principle of superposition, and ALL telecom networks in this world are built upon this principle.

I can hear the difference when I color the backside of a CD black, so what if ALL the data CDs have never had problems with light colored backside.

I can hear the difference between a 44.1kHz sampling and 196 kHz sampling, so what if your science says it makes no difference to my ears because I lack the sensors in my ear to notice the high frequency difference.

:lol::lol::lol:

 

[msagar]

FYI:Listening to 16/44.1 v. Higher Definitions

Listening to 16/44.1 v. Higher Definitions | AudioStream



The only source of knowledge is experience : Einstein

 

[kumarab]

^^Seen that page before. Unless they clearly state that these were 20k band limited recordings, the comparisons will be utterly moot.

I've seen you post quite a bit on this matter, and I think you're still not clear on what we are saying. We are NOT saying that high resolution formats offer no advantages. They certainly can, and WILL, under some circumstances--DAC filtering, band unlimited recordings, or simply a different master.

What we ARE saying is--that if you have a recording in the 20-20KHz humanly audible range (please, no internet stories/anecdotes about golden ears), and a well engineered DAC (this doesn't mean expensive), then 16/44.1 will do it full justice...even 24/96 is understandable for picky DAC filters. However, 24/192 offers absolutely nothing, except humongous file sizes.

NOTE--AGAIN, we are talking about "native" 24/192 files for music playback. Upsampling/oversampling to 24/192 via sw/hw is an entirely different matter, and CAN have its pros...cons as well.

Finally..those little blurbs of wisdom..the latest about "experience". It's a little difficult to grasp the intent of written words and respond appropriately--it could be condescension, sarcasm, or a genuine thought. So, thank you for that thought.

 

[msagar]

The point I am trying to make is- Please listen to native 24-192 files and comment / discuss, do not go by the content on the internet.

 

[kumarab]

I know that's what you're saying. You are just assuming we have no experience with high resolution playback. Trust me, there's lots of it.

Also, the "experience" of anything audio, be it formats or electronics, has more to do with factors not related to "how it sounds" at all. People associate entire lines of brands as warm, laid-back, bright and what not. Change LED colors to between Red/Blue/Yellow..and you'll have people proclaiming it sounds warm/methodical/detailed etc....yes, for the SAME amp.

They've (the hi-fi industry) exploited all other ideas already--magic pebbles, markers, clocks, voodoo cables, DACs, jitter ghosts etc etc..and now they'll stretch this resolution war like a chewing gum

Do an honest ABX test (foobar2k will let you) between 16/44 and 24/192 of the same recording with a band limit of 20k. If you really can pick the higher resolution with a better-than-chance probability, then you shouldn't listen to any of us and just enjoy your music. I, personally, cannot. Heck, I have trouble differentiating my laptop headphone out from an Audinst HUDMX1.

HOWEVER, I own about 60 odd MFSL and Japan First Press, Black Triangle CDs--and I can probably pick them out a 100% of the time against any HR track, DSD, SACD etc.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Please listen to native 24-192 files and comment / discuss...

My interface only supports 96, but, up to that, yes, been there and done that with files I made myself from digitising vinyl. In fact, recorded in 32-bit. No difference that I can hear. In sighted test, I have agonised over detail, "Oh, wow! I didn't hear that before," then back to the 44/16 file and, there it is, the same detail.

With that result, you can imagine that crude blind testing (I didn't know about Foobar's ABX addin then, although, as a penguin, using Windows at all is a hassle to me) didn't give me any reliable differences.

do not go by the content on the internet.

I'm not an engineer or a scientist. Engineers and scientists do post on the net. That is what is worth going by on the internet.

Of course, all those engineers and scientists don't necessarily agree, so it is hardly a source of absolute dogma, except, perhaps, in basics like the frequency range of human hearing which must have been known for as long as people have measuring frequency.

 

[msagar]

Kumarab,

Chesky, MFSL, ECM and other pressings are not available everywhere.

The CD pressings by most of the plants do not produce master tape quality product.

This is one of the reasons high rez downloads have become popular.

For some reason in my experience native 24-192 files sound better.