Hi-Rez Highway

I think "implied resolution" is a better descriptor for the 13.1 "bits"

63.139.239.134

meisterkleef

In Reply to: RE: Traffic "John Barleycorn Must Die" posted by Mr_Steady on September 24, 2015 at 18:37:00

you calculated. Obviously the true bit-depth is 24bits as shown by the software in the upper left. Most of it wasted as shown by your calc. Thanks so much for these posts. Truly enlightening.

Follow Ups:

RE: I think "implied resolution" is a better descriptor for the 13.1 "bits" - John Elison 18:33:47 09/25/15 (3)
I think the "implied resolution" is 24-bits, but the "effective resolution" or "true resolution" is 13.1-bits.
- RE: I think "implied resolution" is a better descriptor for the 13.1 "bits" - Mr_Steady 06:38:06 09/26/15 (2)
  Well that didn't take long.
  
  Oh let's get even more technical. Should it be 13.1 bits or just 13 bits. I included the .1 because if I didn't I figured someone would point it out.
  
  ----------------------------------------------------------------
  Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
  - RE: I think "implied resolution" is a better descriptor for the 13.1 "bits" - John Elison 08:10:21 09/26/15 (1)
    I don't see anything wrong with fractional bit-depths. When I recorded vinyl at 24/96 with my Alesis Masterlink, which doesn't have a volume control, I sometimes had recordings with peak levels of -10-dB. I would normalize them so the loudest peak came up to full-scale in the finalized playable version. Consequently, they appeared to be 24-bit recordings, but in reality their resolution was still only 22.3-bits.
    
    Best regards,
    John Elison
    - RE: I think "implied resolution" is a better descriptor for the 13.1 "bits" - Mr_Steady 08:27:57 09/26/15 (0)
      Thanks JE.
      
      BTW you called it better than I remembered it. They do take the analog out from a dac and run it into a tube preamp, and then to an ADC. That explains to me how you could take a low res file, and add in enough natural looking high frequency harmonics to make it look like a real hi-res file. I linked the ad again, because I meant to link the 24/176 in the first place.
      
      To me 24/96 upsampled to 24/176 this way is no more 24/176, than if you upsampled an Mp3 to 24/176 that way. They should just sell the original 24/96 original capture. I can choose my own software and tube preamps.
      
      -----------------------------------------------------------------
      Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
      http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/103387/Peter_Breiner-Musso (Open in New Window)
RE: I think "implied resolution" is a better descriptor for the 13.1 "bits" - Mr_Steady 10:23:35 09/25/15 (0)
You're welcome, and these tests have taught me a few things. Like hang onto your vinyl.
Thanks for the nomenclature tip. It makes sense, and I will use it in the future, unless someone else corrects me. :)

--------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!

Edits: 09/25/15

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Signature Sound

[ Signature Sound Lounge ]