FLAC versus WAV

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
fwiwfm, imho, the 24-bit 44.1kHz Beatles USB Apple sounds absolutely wonderful to me!!

Well, yeah, but so do the CDs! That's like saying the freshly made-up, elegantly-dressed Charlize Theron looks wonderful to you. Of course she does. But hose her down and she'd still look wonderful. :)

Tim
 

garylkoh

WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Sep 6, 2010
5,599
225
1,190
Seattle, WA
www.genesisloudspeakers.com
Damn! Tim. You had to pick the one actress that I have the hots for.

If it's Charlize Theron, I'll even take her covered in mud :)

 

DonH50

Member Sponsor & WBF Technical Expert
Jun 22, 2010
3,947
306
1,670
Monument, CO
Don, whats your experience relating to recordings sold as 24bit?
I am wondering how many actually use real 24 bit information of the recording and is not just random noise,etc, or a transfer of of 16bit recording.
Are all studio masters actually done in 24 bits these days, and if so just curious any idea when studios started to do this.

BTW not sure if you have been following the following thread, ignore the persistent same few doing the usual arguing against JA and there is a lot of food for thought about 24bit recordings from others including JA in the thread I think from the page onwards linked.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=86649&st=275
Cheers
Orb

My experience with 24-bit recordings is essentially zero. I have heard a couple at a friend's house on his (very nice) system but in our sessions an old Sheffield Labs recording sounded as good or better. I think recording quality is driven by, and in fact dominated by, much more than the number of bits in the samples and by how fast they are taken.

Since I have been out of the biz a long time, just piddling on and off over the past years, I could not say if all or the majority of digital consoles are 24-bit but I strongly suspect so. I first saw 18-bit systems with 96 kS/s rates in the late 90's, IIRC, and the technology has improved significantly since. One of the biggest problems back then was that the computers couldn't keep up with multi-track processing of large bit depths; PC technology has advanced as well so today most everything is 24-bit and I seem to recall press on some 32-bit systems. That is the sampling resolution; most of the processing is performed in 64-bit (or more, especially with the ALUs) floating-point, natch.

What few contacts I have maintained over the years swear by 24-bit in the recording and mastering process but don't say much about the end result since it has to fit the CD standard. Headroom for mixing is the biggest thing mentioned, when an extra 10 dB can be a lot. The end result does not usually require such wide dynamic range.

My personal opinion is that doubling the sample rate and providing real 16-bit linear DACs woiuld provide much benefit; today it takes 18- to 24-bit DACs to achieve nearly ideal (theoretical) 16-bit DAC performance. An 18-bit DAC offers an extra 12 dB of SNR headroom and that could help.

The counter to my argument is the huge dynamic range present in a lot of new material, 30 dB often quoted. If you don't want to clip, ever, then giving up 30 dB to headroom is 5 bits, turning your 16-bit converter into 11 bits. That is low enough (68 dB SNR) to begin to approach the noise floor of some rooms, albeit awfully quiet ones. The bigger issue is that if the average volume level is really half that, 10 dB lower in midband, then you've given up another 3 bits, to an 8-bit equivalent converter. Now noise (48 dB down at 8 bits) and distortion (perhaps 0.1 to 0.4 % typ max at 8 bits) could start to enter the picture for soft sounds...

Hmmm, 24-bits is looking better after all!

Thanks for the link; I'll check it out. I do not follow audio forums much save this one and AVS. Too much else going on in Life! - Don
 

Orb

New Member
Sep 8, 2010
3,010
2
0
Thanks Don and no problem.
That link is hard going to begin with due to a few vocal critics that is rather noticable even from the page I started the link from, but a wealth of info and theory seems to be discussed once you get onto a few pages further along with the poor posts diminishing.

Cheers
Orb
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing