Re: A/B listening tests

[mike@michaelplishka.com]

Ahh for the days when folks had no problems with noisy analog....

> Stefan Tiedje wrote:
>> Bill Fox schrieb:
>>> Speaking of A/B testing, according to what I've read, the difference
>>>  between 16 and 24 bit digital can be heard much more easily than the
>>>  difference between 44.1kHz and 192kHz.
>> That means you read it and believe it?
> Actually, in this particular case, I do and here's why.  Recording at
> the higher sampling frequencies eat up far more more memory than
> increased bit depth and increases system costs.  Then you have to down
> sample to 44.1 in order to release product which requires expensive
> software to do right.  (Why not record at 176.4kHz and avoid the high
> end software?)  It behooves the hardware and software industry to
> convince us that 16bit/192kHz is superior to 24bit/44.1kHz.  (Of course
> 24bit/192kHz is even better!)  Since the 24bit/44.1kHz supposedly sounds
> better and costs me less, I'll go that way.  I have also spoken to
> industry people who confirm the increased bit depth is a far more
> audible improvement than increased sample frequency.  I have not heard
> the other system nor do I have a room where I could hear the difference
> so I can't speak from personal experience.  However, the golden ears in
> the industry who say that you need 192kHz all seem to have a stake in
> its success.  There is just as much physics at work when increasing and
> linearizing dynamic range.  As an engineer who believes in the Nyquist
> theorem and as an over 50 year old male who (as I've read) can't hear
> much above 12kHz, I see no reason to go to 192kHz, especially when most
> listening environments are far less than ideal and most people are only
> going to be listening to a crappy MP3 file anyway.
>
> A higher sampling frequency gives you a wider frequency response that I
> supposedly can't hear.  Increased bit depth reduces the noise floor and
> decreases distortion due to LSB errors.  In any digital system,
> distortion goes up as you approach the lowest volumes.  These are things
> that I *can* hear.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
>