Loptec

UnderTow

Loptec


Anledningen till att jag kanske inte uttryckte mig helt korrekt i mitt första meddelande är kanske att engelska inte är mitt förstaspråk. Om jag hade skrivit det på svenska hade jag nog kunnat uttrycka mig på ett mer korrekt sätt. Jag tycker ändå att min metafor gav en ganska tydlig bild av vad jag menade. Nu förväntar jag mig ett välskrivet och genomtänkt svar av dig, Undertow, på svenska.

Det är inte min avsikt att konfrontera, men hittar du alla dessa detaljer viktiga. Din analogi är felaktig eftersom Sverige i engelska som han. Analogin stämmer inte sig själv. Inte bara de ord du använder.

UnderTow

Sorry.. Google translate is crap when it comes to grammer, my friend.. :)

 great reading this thread! its like a good series on TV

jyeager11

John

Correct. Sort of. 24 bits gives one more steps in the dynamic range. The loudest sound and the lowest sound could be the same with 16 bits. You just have more levels in between with 24 bits.

Hence Loptec's use of the word RESOLUTION. And it is a spot-on analogy.

Here the graphic analogy works somewhat. 

Not "somewhat", John. It just works. It is the very definition of resolution.

Notice though I am talking about BIT DEPTH not sample rate. So don't think I am agreeing with you.

Make one more chip to the game.. what about DI box... anyone here can hear the difference?

rabeach


"if the sampling rate exceeds 2B samples" are you really not able to comprehend that.

I do comprehend but you clearly don't. It means you need a sampling rate that is at least twice the highest frequency you want to sample. So if you want to record frequencies up to 20Khz, you need a sampling rate of at least 40Khz.

What did you think it meant?

UnderTow

Freddie H


Make one more chip to the game.. what about DI box... anyone here can hear the difference?

Sure, I heard the difference in my DI box last evening. It was night and day!
 
Sven

John

Notice though I am talking about BIT DEPTH not sample rate. So don't think I am agreeing with you.

Do you even know what my argument is at this point, John?

I made no distinction between bit depth and sample rates. I'm stating that Loptec's metaphor is a good one for understanding why higher resolutions during production is always a better idea than working strictly in what the final output will be. I did not go more in-depth than that. It's people's blanket objection to the metaphor that I have a problem with.

More levels between two points is the very definition of resolution, and it's a wonderful analogy for anyone who doesn't understand why he should be recording and mixing in anything except 16 bits / 44.1 kHz because that is what the listener will be listening to.

jyeager11

John

Correct. Sort of. 24 bits gives one more steps in the dynamic range. The loudest sound and the lowest sound could be the same with 16 bits. You just have more levels in between with 24 bits.

Hence Loptec's use of the word RESOLUTION. And it is a spot-on analogy.

There is no resolution in audio. It is not a good metaphor. Go and educate yourself before participating in subjects you clearly don't understand.

As to John's quote above. It is true in the strictest sense in a properly dithered system but one has to realise that the noise floor of a 16 bit system will be higher than that of a 24 bit system. That means that although you can indeed use a 16 bit system to record signals that are as low as that of a 24 bit system but those signals will be buried in noise.

UnderTow

As to John's quote above. It is true in the strictest sense in a properly dithered system but one has to realise that the noise floor of a 16 bit system will be higher than that of a 24 bit system. That means that although you can indeed use a 16 bit system to record signals that are as low as that of a 24 bit system but those signals will be buried in noise.

True.

I was trying to avoid the noise floor issue. LOL

UnderTow

rabeach


"if the sampling rate exceeds 2B samples" are you really not able to comprehend that.

I do comprehend but you clearly don't. It means you need a sampling rate that is at least twice the highest frequency you want to sample. So if you want to record frequencies up to 20Khz, you need a sampling rate of at least 40Khz.

What did you think it meant?

UnderTow

Correct! True in theory... He also saying there are benefits using more then 44.1 kHz. 24bit infact 48kHz or higher are need of capture overtones and oversampling...example EQ filters and so on...1976 there were nothing like CD:s or MP3 what ever...
 
Remember Nyqvist died 1976 so what he had to say about all this today would be probably a lot different...
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Nyquist