The Bat Ear Test - 16bit vs 24bit

[luke_m]

After suggestions from lebouche & Stick & tptman, I have decided to change my workflow and test out bouncing WAVs down at 24 bit.

I bounced something with cymbals, But I've forgotten if Charles or someone said you MIGHT notice it there OR if you WONT notice it there... Maybe its all void if as I am sampling off records?

Anyway if anyone has Bat Ears can you tell the difference between these files?

3 files are in the zip file,

1) A bounced WAV 44.1 16bit
2) A bounced WAV 44.1 24bit
3) The original 88khz 24bit file

Download SampleRate.zip (50mb) (http://www.mediafire.com/?3ww5mnnlgnq)

-----------------
Links I found while tryna find mediafire's website on the PSN Blog and Show Notes:
http://www.wikirecording.org/DAW
http://www.mil-media.com/docs/articles/powr.shtml

[Thumper]

Eh... It all gets tossed into an mp3 anyway.

I can't wait for the day when people track sessions to 128k mp3s, so I can carry a 40 track session on a 250 meg flash drive.

My mixes sound like ass by the way.

[luke_m]

hehe, lets hope it doesnt get like that, were you able to hear any difference in the 3? :Yawn:

[boosh]

If you line up both on a different audiotrack in your sequencer and flip Phase on one of them.

The sound you here at playback is what the 16 bit file is missing.

[Tonzauber]

well... bit depth has nothing to do with frequency resultion... it only determins the number of possible levels... so its not actually for the bat eared :-D

But for sure there is some difference to notice in the behaviour of the noisefloor. If you know what to listen for, you can quite easily determin wheter its 16 bits _or more_. It's quite hard to distinguish 20bits from 24bit though.

[lebouche]

I've always found the difference quite plainly audible...when you work on a track in 24 bit for a week or so and then listen to the 16 bit bounce it seems really quite drastic.

[Pimp-X]

24 bit sounds pro-er.

[eagan]

24 bit sounds pro-er.

Hmm.

Could the Pimpster be being, maybe, just a teensy tiny slight bit facetious there?

NAH.

Not our Tim. He would never think of doing such a thing!










OK, seriously. The level of useful purpose in taking some audio examples and stuffing them into an MP3 file and doing serious, uh, "bat ear" comparison seems to be somewhere between "nada" and "you're kidding, right?".


But, hey, as long as we're on the subject, it is proper to use the term "resolution" both in terms of sample frequency and bit depth. Keep in mind that any conversion of analog audio signals to digital data involves some "squaring off" of a complex waveform to a grid. Imagine drawing the waveform on a piece of graph paper but you have to alter it to strictly follow the gridlines on the graph paper. The X axis is frequency/time and the Y axis is amplitude. The closer together the gridlines, the finer the "resolution", hence the closer the audio coming back out after D->A conversion will be to the original audio that went in.

It matters, and there are good reasons why people willingly deal with one and a half times as much data piling up to work in 24 bit.

The more you get into the quieter stuff (like, as an example, open, sparse material with long reverb tails), the more it matters.

But anyway. Using an MP3 file as a listening test is a badly designed experiment. It's like looking at a snapshot photograph of a painting.


JLE

[Stick]

24 bit sounds pro-er.

Oh man, that's EXACTLY what I'm after... I just wanna be "pro-er"

:Thumbsup:

[luke_m]

but there not mp3s, there WAV files...? there isnt any difference is there:Yawn:

[HOOK]

The more you get into the quieter stuff (like, as an example, open, sparse material with long reverb tails), the more it matters.

JLE

Well thats (as I suspect, No, Know that Eagan is aware of!) because increased bitrate enables you to record quieter, not louder.... :Wink:



HOOK

[eagan]

because increased bitrate enables you to record quieter, not louder....

As Hook said.


And to Luke, yes, indeed, I am a dumbass, looking again, it was WAV files, not MP3 files.

Doh!

Serves me right for jumping in without more coffee in my system and just glancing at a comment in the thread about MP3s.


JLE

[luke_m]

cool cool, i still am uncertain if i should adopt the 24 bit system, i'd be happy to rebounce my entire library, but as far as my everyday not studio trained ears, it sounds the same... the pro tools dithering is just too good:Yawn:

[dwoz]

But, hey, as long as we're on the subject, it is proper to use the term "resolution" both in terms of sample frequency and bit depth. Keep in mind that any conversion of analog audio signals to digital data involves some "squaring off" of a complex waveform to a grid. Imagine drawing the waveform on a piece of graph paper but you have to alter it to strictly follow the gridlines on the graph paper. The X axis is frequency/time and the Y axis is amplitude. The closer together the gridlines, the finer the "resolution", hence the closer the audio coming back out after D->A conversion will be to the original audio that went in.



Well...this really isn't a particularly accurate explanation of what happens. PCM encoding/decoding of audio doesn't really work this way, although, it is convenient to think of it this way, because the same kind of degradations occur, as if it was being done the way you describe.

more on this to come.

dwoz

[eagan]

Pretty much the best quickie crude analogy I could come up with to get a general idea across.

It would be good to have a better explanation of what's going on in this from brighter and more knowledgable minds here (I'm not your guy for this one).


JLE

[HOOK]

Regarding the 16bit vs 24bit issue:
The increased bitrate is mainly bebeficial in the "workingstage" of things, not the listaning stage...
Ofcourse there is a differense if you A-B test it... but nevertheless...



HOOK

[bunnerabb]

If you ever get anything into the top 40, it will be heard by...

People at concerts through God awful stacks of whatever they threw at the rider and mixed by a guy whose ears are still stuffed up from the plane ride.

People with iPods who have ripped it to 64k.

People in dance clubs where they have to shout to hear the chick across the room who may or may not want to fuck them and came there just for that purpose.

People in bars with money for the juke who are too hammered to make out the words let alone the audio quality through the 5" speakers with beer on them.

One motherfucker with a pair of Futterman monoblocks and a pair of Alon by Acarian Phalanx speakers who will pronounce it "not as good as vinyl."

It really doesn't matter.

[HOOK]

If you ever get anything into the top 40, it will be heard by...

.......

It really doesn't matter.

sounds like you´ve given up..;) Have you? :) hope not!!

Well me for one is not aiming for to 40!! *nose in air*
I´m creating art! No one understands it, no one knows about it, no one byes it and no one wants to hear it; ART!! :Twisted: :Roll eyes:


HOOK

[eagan]

Aw, never mind Bunner, I think it's just the winter cabin fever talking.

I always thought that you tried to make everything sound the best you could, to the most critical and attuned listener, in the best possible playback situation...... and then accepted the fact that sometimes it will be heard in ways where people couldn't tell the difference, and wouldn't notice if it was possible.


But he does have a certain point. Sometimes, this is something that really doesn't matter, realistically. I invoke one of the classic answers to audio and musical questions: "it depends..".

If you're sitting there working stuff and listening close and with a 24 bit version and 16 bit version of the same thing, you can't tell the difference, OK, go with it. In some cases with some material it really won't matter.


One thing kind of made me pause and say "huh?" though:

i still am uncertain if i should adopt the 24 bit system, i'd be happy to rebounce my entire library

I'm not sure I get this. What exactly are you talking about doing?


JLE

[bunnerabb]

Well.

Actually,

truly,

to tell it tr0o..

I do get weary

but I never,

never compromise.

Amen.

Sleah.

[HOOK]

Love your avatar Bunnerabb!!! :very happy:


:Roll eyes: ...somewhat OT, I know but what the....It´s a nice pic

HOOK

[bunnerabb]

Supposed to be animated. :Sad:

[luke_m]

Quote:
i still am uncertain if i should adopt the 24 bit system, i'd be happy to rebounce my entire library
I'm not sure I get this. What exactly are you talking about doing?

Well with making sample based music / hiphop, I have all my WAV's organised into folders, eg Drums, Bass, Piano, Guitar...

I record them all at 88/24 then export them from protools to 44/16, but i save the original protools file, so because i have the originals, i could re-export them.

But I have pretty much made my mind up not to go 24 bit. :Yawn: