Is 24 bit the New "in HD"

Basspartout said

Noise-n-Music said
This resolution completele covers potential of the human perception.

Haha, so far from the truth. 44.1 / 16 bit was not more or less than a compromise made by the industy in the 1980s. Although mots of listeners/consumers (and sound engineers!!) got used to it, it’s ridiculous to say that it covers human perception.

I think Noise-n-Music was referencing that human hearing roughly covers 20hz-22khz. So anything above that isn’t perceivable by human ears. A 44.1 sample rate extends way past the top of that range.

Lmz said
I think Noise-n-Music was referencing that human hearing roughly covers 20hz-22khz. So anything above that isn’t perceivable by human ears. A 44.1 sample rate extends way past the top of that range.

that’s not totally true actually a sample rate of 44.1 means that you can go up to frequencies of 22 (half of 44). It’s called the nyquist frequency. This is principle is used to prevent aliasing in audio track. So 96 goes up to 48khz (which seems totally ridiculous to me, all-tough I heard of a mastering engineer boosting his eq at 40khz because it gave a special crisp to his track)

My opinion is that you better don’t use 96khz unless you know what your doing because those high frequencies absorb a lot of your headroom without you noticing.

Pianojungle said

Lmz said
I think Noise-n-Music was referencing that human hearing roughly covers 20hz-22khz. So anything above that isn’t perceivable by human ears. A 44.1 sample rate extends way past the top of that range.

that’s not totally true actually a sample rate of 44.1 means that you can go up to frequencies of 22 (half of 44). It’s called the nyquist frequency. This is principle is used to prevent aliasing in audio track.

Good to know!

And on that note…

AlumoAudio said
And on that note…

Perfect.

haha that’s an awesome alumo

Lol. I was waiting for you to post that picture, Matt!

Man, there is so much misinformation out there nowadays about what actually equates to “better” that I’ve almost stopped wanting to fight it.

The next time you find yourself imagining that 24bit playback sounds better… try this. Put a bit-reduction plugin on the master buss of a song that you are mixing. Start at 16bits and slowly reduce down to 10bits resolution.

Let me know if you hear the difference Prepare to be baffled.

joshhunsaker said
The next time you find yourself imagining that 24bit playback sounds better… try this. Put a bit-reduction plugin on the master buss of a song that you are mixing. Start at 16bits and slowly reduce down to 10bits resolution.

Of course 10bit is much worse. One sample has only 1024 different levels it can be at while 16bit has 65536. But once you go to higher bit-depths that number is going to increase for sure but there comes a moment when the differences are unhearable.

Comparing 16 bit and 24 bit is like comparing a machine gun that shoots 700 rpm and 900 rpm. If you stand in front of it you die anyways.