When hi-res audio stops making sense…

[CN211276]

https://sonicscoop.com/why-almost-every ... bly-wrong/

On topic and informative. A bit lengthy but not technical and well worth reading. Where play back is concerned 24 Bit is overkill.

[Geoff.R.G]

As I am sure you know bit depth determines dynamic range. It seems rather pointless to compress the dynamics out of a recording, or performance, and then issue it as 24bit. A friend, who used to run a recording studio, once cautioned that “if you can hear the compression, you’re using too much”. He was right.

[TheMadMick]

https://sonicscoop.com/why-almost-every ... bly-wrong/

On topic and informative. A bit lengthy but not technical and well worth reading. Where play back is concerned 24 Bit is overkill.

Told.ya.so..(spacebar's.gone.AWOL)

[Fretless]

Not entirely in agreement with this article and find it over-simplified. It is also not written from an audiophile standpoint but that of a general listener.

My own upsampling experiments do provide subtle improvements in spaciousness and depth with 24bit playback.

Another case in point would be HDCD encoding where 4 extra bits of dynamic expression are applied to a standard 16bit audio signal, with the resulting SQ being clearly improved.




Oh ... and CN - your Mscaler upsamples to 24bit.

[CN211276]

Not entirely in agreement with this article and find it over-simplified. It is also not written from an audiophile standpoint but that of a general listener.

My own upsampling experiments do provide subtle improvements in spaciousness and depth with 24bit playback.

Another case in point would be HDCD encoding where 4 extra bits of dynamic expression are applied to a standard 16bit audio signal, with the resulting SQ being clearly improved.




Oh ... and CN - your Mscaler upsamples to 24bit.

The Mscaler does not change the Bit rate. 16Bit is upsampled to 705kHz and 24Bit is upsampled to 765kHz providing the incoming sample rate is 48kHz or above. Whatever difference this makes is insignificant in comparison to the quality of the master and the amount of compression.

I agree that upsampling provides a greater sense of space which severe compression and its effect on dynamic range does not significantly change if the master is decent. To these ears the upsampling improvement is significant and I can listen for extended periods without fatigue, although too much compression is annoying.

For me what is important is upsampling, the quality of the master and the amount of compression.

[Lindsayt]

As I am sure you know bit depth determines dynamic range. It seems rather pointless to compress the dynamics out of a recording, or performance, and then issue it as 24bit. A friend, who used to run a recording studio, once cautioned that “if you can hear the compression, you’re using too much”. He was right.

99.5% of the 21st century CD's that I own have used too much compression then.

And I would say to your friend "How about giving us the consumers the option to buy recordings with zero conscious dynamic compression?"

With modern recording and manufacturing methods this could be done for minimal additional cost.
And, bear in mind that the recording you make today may be listened to in 500 years time.

[CN211276]

The Mscaler does not change the Bit rate. 16Bit is upsampled to 705kHz and 24Bit is upsampled to 765kHz providing the incoming sample rate is 48kHz or above.

From the Chord Mscaler manual:
Chord Electronics
Hugo M Scaler | Manual

Hugo M Scaler is a
device that converts
your sources to 705.6 or
768kHz 24-bit PCM and achieves
reconstruction of the original
analogue signal in the ADC to a
better than 16-bit accuracy under
all conditions.

It seems that there is a confusion arising between bit-depth on playback and compression applied during the mastering process. No amount of technical jiggery-pokery can change the recording on playback - it can only try to reproduce the signal from the carrier with as much accuracy as possible. Upsampling to a higher sampling rate and extending the bit-depth from 16 to 24 bits to give a greater dynamic range.

But it still won't change a sow's ear into a silk purse.

[CN211276]

I am sceptical about claims that the Mscaler improves Bit Rate. If it did it would be logical to assume that 44kHz would be upsampled to 765kHz. I do not recall earlier Mscaler manuals making such claims. As far as dynamic range and compression are concerned we are very much at the mercy of the record companies and artists.

[Geoff.R.G]

As I am sure you know bit depth determines dynamic range. It seems rather pointless to compress the dynamics out of a recording, or performance, and then issue it as 24bit. A friend, who used to run a recording studio, once cautioned that “if you can hear the compression, you’re using too much”. He was right.

99.5% of the 21st century CD's that I own have used too much compression then.

And I would say to your friend "How about giving us the consumers the option to buy recordings with zero conscious dynamic compression?"

With modern recording and manufacturing methods this could be done for minimal additional cost.
And, bear in mind that the recording you make today may be listened to in 500 years time.

I am sure he would have been happy to oblige but he has been out of the recording business for many years.

[Geoff.R.G]

There is a huge amount of confusion, possibly deliberate, around the term compression.
There is digital compression, a software process that reduces the size of a file, preferably it is "lossless".
Then there is audio compression or dynamic range compression.
The former can be removed to restore the full size file, the latter cannot be removed from a recording, as with blown highlights in a digital photograph, once it's gone, it's gone.

Not suggesting that anyone here doesn't understand but, unfortunately many don't and, much more worryingly, don't want to.