Author Topic: 24-bit for the masses  (Read 4550 times)

ffcal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 877
    • View Profile
Re: 24-bit for the masses
« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2011, 12:52:34 PM »
Mike, 
I see what you're saying, but I think Pete brings up a good example of where the seemingly better format does not always win.  Other examples of this might be Beta v. VHS or DAT.  In the same way, I think it would be speculative to predict an ultimate winner in the format wars, whether it be a 24-bit sound file or something else.  Also, isn't 24-bit more of a processing medium?

Forrest

Altus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
    • Altus - aural journeys for the mind's eye
Re: 24-bit for the masses
« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2011, 04:37:16 PM »
Yeah, I see what you're saying.  It's just that it seems so close to our grasp.
Also, isn't 24-bit more of a processing medium?
Sure, mastering at a higher bit depth has it's advantages, but there's no reason it can't be used for playback as well.  It would certainly be a bonus for classical movements where the dynamic range is huge.
Mike Carss -- Altus : aural journeys for the mind's eye
www.altusmusic.ca

APK

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
    • View Profile
    • DataObscura
Re: 24-bit for the masses
« Reply #22 on: February 26, 2011, 04:42:00 PM »
Forget the technical details (its mathematical), but wasn't 16 bit used because audio from 20-20k can be perfectly encoded in that many bits?

I'm talking about the final rendering, not recording and working ... for which 24 bit is more useful.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2011, 04:47:23 PM by APK »
www.dataobscura.com
www.dataobscura.com/apk
The Circular Ruins / Lammergeyer / Nunc Stans

Julio Di Benedetto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 697
  • Life is a privilege, not a right!
    • View Profile
    • Digtalvoices
Re: 24-bit for the masses
« Reply #23 on: February 26, 2011, 09:59:50 PM »
Anything Apple does is motivated by one thing.....selling more hardware.  Anything they develop regarding 24 bit play back has this in mind.   What could be more exciting is how it spins and where such technology goes.  As an Apple loving American with 2 Mac's in my studio I think this is about sales, for what, we will have to wait and see.

Forrest's concerns are well founded.....this could be really something for file based music and a further weakening of the compact disc, except you still have the download problem.

Within audio production, I remember reading a few years back that mastering engineers have clients that prefer to download via FTP their 24bit audio 74 min music  which can takes a day to download because its still faster than overnight express by carrier of choice for a physical disc.  This is especially true from a global perspective and it illustrates the point....our bandwidth is not up to the task and as far as the masses go....Things may be some what faster today but not to appease the masses.

I welcome any increase in audio fidelity especially if it means getting rid of compressed audio.  The mp3 was/is an effective way of dealing with the inadequacies of our bandwidth and making
possible devices like the iPod, but it is a sorry format, like the 8 track and in some ways the cassette.....there you go,  the tape cassette and the walkman, the mp3 and the iPod,  the 24bit and the ....?

 

   

jdh

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: 24-bit for the masses
« Reply #24 on: February 27, 2011, 12:49:52 AM »
This may be off topic but talking about higher quality downloads,sacd,flac,etc..all depends on hearing it first,thus what is the music being heard through. Let's see,the useless iPod buds or hundreds like them,your crappy car stereo,with bass and treble control,your little iPod dock with speakers,etc...at a certain point ,it makes me laugh or cry.while there are many of us here who are audio lovers,most would not know the difference and never will because it takes time and dedication and money,therefore eliminating the idea from the market unless it comes for free or a minimal charge,dream on,thus charging a premium for these services. However i would pay a premium if charged by itunes for better audio as long as it does not become higher that the physical cd which it has already on some sites where a flac file cost more than the cd,this from the same online store.that being said,I on occasion buy from iTunes and have to say that at 256,it is not too bad. I can also say that after listening to flac through my iPod on custom in ear monitors,then switching to the same track through a cd player and quality headphones and amp,there is no comparison,therefore my argument of not just the quality of the files but playback as well.

jkn

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2732
  • cake or death? cake please.
    • View Profile
    • Relaxed Machinery
Re: 24-bit for the masses
« Reply #25 on: March 28, 2011, 08:51:41 AM »

worth reading this article I just posted at rM.ning: 

http://relaxedmachinery.ning.com/forum/topics/flac-vs-aacmp3-if-radiohead

Radiohead is releasing / promoting / etc...  it's new album in flac.
John Koch-Northrup .: jkn [AT] johei.com .: owner / artist .: http://relaxedmachinery.com .: http://twitter.com/jkn .: http://flickr.com/johei