|
Wav Or 320 (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| airwalker1 |
| there is a diffrent sound for mp3 and wav for shure oversample for one but i think its best to make your tracks the best you can before coverting over to what ever format you think is best.i allways aim for 192kb and 16 bit wav any higher just sounds a bit to oversampled to me. :toocool: |
|
|
| Darkarbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by airwalker1
there is a diffrent sound for mp3 and wav for shure oversample for one but i think its best to make your tracks the best you can before coverting over to what ever format you think is best.i allways aim for 192kb and 16 bit wav any higher just sounds a bit to oversampled to me. :toocool: |
Fail.
Quit listening to eurodance. It's easily noticeable in pretty much any other genre. |
|
|
| Sanguis Mortuum |
| quote: | Originally posted by airwalker1
any higher just sounds a bit to oversampled to me. |
Err, what? |
|
|
| kitphillips |
| This is why I'm so sick of these discussions. A bit too oversampled:rolleyes: |
|
|
| 3F05Q |
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
just totally confused about the relationship between song dynamics (lack thereof) and reduction of bitrate... |
This is actually something that I haven't thought of until recently. On the entire subject... It depends mostly on what you're doing the listening with. The stuff I'm dealing with at work is amazing. I never believed the SACD hype, until I listened on some worthy speakers. I never thought I'd say, but there is a definately noticable difference between standard CD and SACD. Moving forward I decided to compare MP3s, and the difference is, again, quite noticible on REALLY good speakers.
Now, with all this talk of Nyquist Freq, I'm inclined to comment. For the sake of conversation, let's use nice round numbers. Let's say we have a "CD" sampling rate of 40kHz. At 20kHz (the Nyquist Frequency) we have a square wave. Now, that's assuming the phase of the recording is SPOT ON to the input... otherwise we get a 'beatnote'. Not important to be perfect at that high a frequency, but I think you see that at that frequency we have no dynamic definition at ALL. Anyway, what do we have at 10kHz? ONE sample per QUARTER wavelength. No dynamics there. 5kHz... two samples per quarter wavelength. Better, but depending on the phase of the analog wav being recorded, it can make a huge difference in the way the waveform is reproduced. So, yeah, bitrate can have a big affect on dynamics. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
| quote: | Originally posted by 3F05Q
This is actually something that I haven't thought of until recently. On the entire subject... It depends mostly on what you're doing the listening with. The stuff I'm dealing with at work is amazing. I never believed the SACD hype, until I listened on some worthy speakers. I never thought I'd say, but there is a definately noticable difference between standard CD and SACD. Moving forward I decided to compare MP3s, and the difference is, again, quite noticible on REALLY good speakers.
Now, with all this talk of Nyquist Freq, I'm inclined to comment. For the sake of conversation, let's use nice round numbers. Let's say we have a "CD" sampling rate of 40kHz. At 20kHz (the Nyquist Frequency) we have a square wave. Now, that's assuming the phase of the recording is SPOT ON to the input... otherwise we get a 'beatnote'. Not important to be perfect at that high a frequency, but I think you see that at that frequency we have no dynamic definition at ALL. Anyway, what do we have at 10kHz? ONE sample per QUARTER wavelength. No dynamics there. 5kHz... two samples per quarter wavelength. Better, but depending on the phase of the analog wav being recorded, it can make a huge difference in the way the waveform is reproduced. So, yeah, bitrate can have a big affect on dynamics. |
Interesting idea... how does this interact with bit depth? If I have a 16 bit recording, doesn't that imply that every sample is 16 bits deep? Regardless of frequency? |
|
|
| Vortex_SA |
| quote: | Originally posted by 3F05Q
This is actually something that I haven't thought of until recently. On the entire subject... It depends mostly on what you're doing the listening with. The stuff I'm dealing with at work is amazing. I never believed the SACD hype, until I listened on some worthy speakers. I never thought I'd say, but there is a definately noticable difference between standard CD and SACD. Moving forward I decided to compare MP3s, and the difference is, again, quite noticible on REALLY good speakers.
Now, with all this talk of Nyquist Freq, I'm inclined to comment. For the sake of conversation, let's use nice round numbers. Let's say we have a "CD" sampling rate of 40kHz. At 20kHz (the Nyquist Frequency) we have a square wave. Now, that's assuming the phase of the recording is SPOT ON to the input... otherwise we get a 'beatnote'. Not important to be perfect at that high a frequency, but I think you see that at that frequency we have no dynamic definition at ALL. Anyway, what do we have at 10kHz? ONE sample per QUARTER wavelength. No dynamics there. 5kHz... two samples per quarter wavelength. Better, but depending on the phase of the analog wav being recorded, it can make a huge difference in the way the waveform is reproduced. So, yeah, bitrate can have a big affect on dynamics. |
all this is nice and neat, but i think the dynamics everyone is talking about here is musical dynamics such as in "breakdowns" or "drops" or whatever you call it, isnt it so?
and i really think with all the respect i give to analog formats and WAVs that in a club, drunk, sometime just talking to a girl even the audiophiles there wouldn't notice a difference, and thats all there is to me, after all i wont be playing in a studio ill play in a club or a pub or whatever... not the most acoustically treated venue you know ;) |
|
|
| Sanguis Mortuum |
| quote: | Originally posted by 3F05Q
At 20kHz (the Nyquist Frequency) we have a square wave. Now, that's assuming the phase of the recording is SPOT ON to the input... otherwise we get a 'beatnote'. Not important to be perfect at that high a frequency, but I think you see that at that frequency we have no dynamic definition at ALL. Anyway, what do we have at 10kHz? ONE sample per QUARTER wavelength. No dynamics there. 5kHz... two samples per quarter wavelength. |
Oh dear, you really don't know what you're talking about do you... |
|
|
| kitphillips |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sanguis Mortuum
Oh dear, you really don't know what you're talking about do you... |
Is this your reaction to everything? One might get the impression your a little arrogant hey? |
|
|
| Sanguis Mortuum |
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
Is this your reaction to everything? One might get the impression your a little arrogant hey? |
Its only my reaction when the person Im reacting to doesnt know what they're talking about. |
|
|
| Vortex_SA |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sanguis Mortuum
Its only my reaction when the person Im reacting to doesnt know what they're talking about. |
explain, in detail, otherwise both of those posts are worthless. |
|
|
| Sanguis Mortuum |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vortex_SA
explain, in detail, otherwise both of those posts are worthless. |
'Dynamics' is differences in volume, and volume resolution is determined by the bit-depth. Saying that sample-rate has any effect on dynamics is completely meaningless.
He also is trying to say that only having two samples per cycle up at 20khz makes a square wave, when everyone knows that DA converters always interpolate the samples to create a sine (using the Whittaker–Shannon interpolation formula), and that the Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem guarantees that bandlimited signals (i.e. signals which have a maximum frequency) can be reconstructed perfectly from their sampled version, if the sampling rate is more than twice the maximum frequency. Only at frequencies above the nyquist does aliasing occur.
(All it would take is a cursory look at the wikipedia page on sampling to educate yourself in these matters, but I guess thats too much to ask of some people) |
|
|
|
|
