Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't understand why anyone gets down on 24-bit consumer audio.

Specifically because CD-quality 16/44 audio has midrange distortion present during complex passages that is completely eliminated and non-present in 24/96 sources.

Listen to "Us and Them" off a 16/44 CD version of the Pink Floyd album Dark Side of the Moon. When it kicks into the chorus, it becomes totally distorted and everything in the midrange bleeds into each other. It's a mess.

Then, try listening to the 24/96 Immersion box set copy or a vinyl-sourced 24/96 rip and you'll find it's gone. When the song gets complex and loud, everything remains totally clear, each instrument stands on it's own, it doesn't become an awful distorted jumble.

You could argue that it's just the quality of the master that makes the difference; but if you take a copy of the original transcoded to 16/44 and compare it again with the 24/96 copy you can hear the same effect.

Why would anyone argue against high-resolution audio anyway? Sure, most everyone will probably just continue downloading 16/44 MP3s, but at least give us the option to have 24bit FLACs of the stuff we really like. Please and thank you.



You could argue it's the quality of the master, and the mastering process, and you'd be right. That's a no-brainer.

"but if you take a copy of the original transcoded to 16/44 and compare it again with the 24/96 copy you can hear the same effect." I could believe that, but do you mean to do the transcoding yourself? IN this case you become the engineer, and the tools you use and all that become vital as well.

Having heard stunningly awesome CD's of DSOTM on a homebuild heathkit amp and some old speakers and not believing my ears when I saw what the setup was, I'm skeptical... can't help it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: