| Author |
Message
|
| synthdude |
 Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:26 am Post subject: Here's something recorded in 24-bit... |
 |
|
Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 910
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Ridzi |
| Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 06 Feb 2004
Posts: 2198
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
|
pretty cool...but sounds too 'sterile'.. i guess i like a little slop.... I really dont see the point as everything gets coverted back to 16bit on playback anyway....
cool piece of music though!! love it... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MB |
| Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 10
Location: PJ
|
Hello people.
| Quote: | | everything gets coverted back to 16bit on playback anyway |
We do listen to comercial music playback at 16 bit and there are no real significant sound qulity at both bit depth (hehe ppl dont even mind mp3). However 24 bit recording allows greater dynamic range during the recording process hence allowing a bigger headroom for the engineer to work with even during the mixdown.
Moreover by the way the industry seems wants to be heading to with dvda and sacd, 24 bit presents an opportunity for the material to be remastered in the future without the need for re-recording. 
_________________
-MB- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ridzi |
| Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 06 Feb 2004
Posts: 2198
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
|
Not that your average listener will notice anyway, but i do understand the need for the extra headroom for the engineers to be able to remaster the recording without the need for it to be re-recorded.
However, as you said the industry 'wants' to be heading towards using dvda and sacd, but due to the higher costs of producing material on said mediums, i personally dont think thats gonna happen anytime soon.
/r |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MB |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 10
Location: PJ
|
| Quote: | | i personally dont think thats gonna happen anytime soon | 
Yeah sad but totally true. The audio industry is constantly falling back when it comes to technological advancement. They're always blaming others, firstly the radio, then cassete tape recording, then mp3, then the internet. They're never the one who's gonna take it to the next step.
_________________
-MB- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ridzi |
| Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2004 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 06 Feb 2004
Posts: 2198
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
|
I dont think it's such a bad thing...i think it would be good if the technology was cheaper.. Normal audio CD's are expensive enough..
/r |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MB |
| Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 3:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 10
Location: PJ
|
Well the think is prices for any new formats shouldnt be any different from existing formats. In fact i dont even understand why cds are more expensive than cassete tapes. They're certainly easier and cheaper to manufacture, and as far as royalty's concerned why should there be a duifferent between either format, the content remains the same.
The weird thing is outside malaysia the prices seems to be consistent between different formats. In uk and usa, prices of dvda and sacds are about the same as audio cds. Imagine how it would be if the price of an audio cd in malaysia remains similar to the price of an audio cassete tape. Wouldn't there be more people buying original cds. Wouldnt it be great both for consumers and the industry.
_________________
-MB- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| synthdude |
| Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:35 pm Post subject: Interesting thread on 16 vs 24... |
|
|
Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 910
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
