DiyMobileAudio.com Car Stereo Forum banner

21 - 24 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
The question you have to ask yourself is "Are Hi-Res files worth it to YOU?" I'll probably never jump on the wagon but this is a hobby so how far you go with it is on you. The only person you should strive to impress with your efforts is you. It's all gravy after that.
I agree! And my answer is NO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,558 Posts
The question you have to ask yourself is "Are Hi-Res files worth it to YOU?" I'll probably never jump on the wagon but this is a hobby so how far you go with it is on you. The only person you should strive to impress with your efforts is you. It's all gravy after that.
Pretty much applies to this entire hobby... could I spend $1,000 on a pair of speakers or will I be just as happy with a pair of $300 speakers. For me, I know I would be happy with the $300 pair.

I have a bunch of high res files on my flash drive, sitting in the garage with the engine off and quiet, yes there is a noticeable difference, in some tracks, certainly not all. Driving along with the road noise, nope, not something I can notice. Which is why 75-80% of my music, if not more, is somewhere between 128 and 320k mp3's
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
You got 2 out of 6 correct!

If you did well on this and were listening through built-in speakers, you either have extraordinary ears or got lucky. If you had trouble picking out different versions of these songs, we give you permission to blame your tools. The speakers on your phone, laptop or tablet weren’t made for anything resembling hi-definition audio. Plug in a pair of headphones and try again.
then my son walks in and says "Dad you won't be able to hear the difference with the laptop speakers"(well at 54 i tried) now i get to use his Head Phones ATH M50x's
now i did not memorize, check setting or which artist i picked correctly. so now the Phones.
You got 3 out of 6 correct!

Despite its bad rap, the MP3 is actually a remarkable feat of engineering, and pretty good at filtering out mostly the sounds you can’t hear. Depending on the quality of your headphones, you might be able to distinguish between the two MP3s, but you’re unlikely to do better without an amplifier or a digital audio converter.
Ok iam going in my Western Room and crank up my home audio and feel Pink Floyd since i can not hear a thing :)
actually it's kinda funny when i kept starting, stopping as fast as i could between the three part tracks listening to the air and hiss differences to make my determination for they all musically sound so identical.
I believe whether it's the Supreme's, CCR, Outlaws, Boston, Elton, Stevie Ray, Bad Co, or Dean Martin it is how music moves me and takes me back through time. I Thank God i can still hear (some what) now these fargin eyes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
433 Posts
.

6/6. Unfortunately I noticed a longer load/play time between each versions on my MacBook Air, so that suggested which one was the larger file.

I just did a comparison listening to Stevie Ray Vaugn - Tin Pan Alley. Listening through Beyerdynamic T5P headphones.
1. Apple Lossless format on iPhone, eq off.
2. HD Tracks DSD 2.8MHz on Fiio X7 Mark II, eq off.
Noticeable improvement with the DSD...crisper highs, more noticeable reverb, deeper bass, overall better sound. I was surprised. However, how much do I attribute improvement to Fiio X7 player over iPhone?
Tried Rush - Tom Sawyer...not much of a difference between iPhone-lossless vs. Fiio X7-48/24.

Will take many more hours of comparison to prove any justifiable advantage. Probably will come down to Re-Masters having a better mix. But if thats what we end up with over..win-win.

Over the years I've been told by recording engineers that there is more that can be done with 16-bit before we need to worry about 20-bit. Now we are talking about 24-bit and 32-bit. I think we've all heard 16-bit recording that we could say to ourselves "that's good enough". Others recordings, not so good.

Read a great article The 24-Bit Delusion at mojo-audio.com
Not crazy long, but an interesting read.

24-bit makes more since to me than 192KHz. Seems 192 sample rate seems way-overkill?

16-bit = dynamic range of over 96dB, 65,536 steps
20-bit = dynamic range of over 120dB, 1,048,576 steps
24-bit = dynamic range of over 144dB, 16,777,216 steps

44.1KHz = 44,100 sample times per second
96KHz = 96,000 ....
192KHz = 192,000 .....

44.1/16 = 28,901376 potential sampling points
96/20 = 1,006,632,900 or 33 times more than CD quality.
192/24 = 256 times the resolution of CD quality.

Grows exponentially...

I read that experts say the finest DAC chips, resistors and power regulators are not capable of greater than 20-bit capacity. Say, yes the chip can decode, because software does exist, but the output from their DAC has capacity for less than 20-bits of resolution and dynamic range.

Article said...When people claim to hear differences between 16-bit, 20-bit and 24-bit recordings, it is not the difference between the bit depth that they are hearing, but rather the difference in the quality of the Digital Mastering. Most 24-bit recordings are mastered with less than the 96dB dynamic range of a 16-bit recording. Only needs to be so loud between quite and maximum volume.
So they commercially market 24-bit recordings by filling some of the Most Significant Bits (MSB) with 1's and some of the Least Significant Bits (LSB) with 0's to pad the overall volume up to the target level. Could have released a recording of identical performance in 16-bit, but say naive customers insist on 24-bit, so the record companies trick them by centering 16-bit of dynamic range in a 24-bit frame. $$$


.
 
21 - 24 of 24 Posts
Top