24/192 music downloads are silly
xiph.org
24/192 music downloads are silly
1–10 of 443 posts
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#2Such "studio" formats don't make sense for end-user listening, but they make sense as inputs to further processing, mixing, etc. Having a pile of headroom in frequency and amplitude means that after further processing you can subsequently output a sensible 16-bit 48kHz file without loss. If you start with a 16-bit 48kHz file and then do a pile of processing, you won't necessarily preserve the same degree of quality.
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#3The summary here is to just rip everything losslessly and then to go ahead and use 44.1/16 since it's actually better in some ways and not worse in others.
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#4I'm not familiar enough with the author's work to know if his credentials merit it, but to me his tone is unbelievably snobbish and offputting.
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#5I'm not familiar enough with the author's work to know if his credentials merit it, but to me his tone is unbelievably snobbish and offputting.
Probably because the people he is offending are (stereotypically) a notoriously snobby and off-putting group...audiophiles.
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#6I'm not familiar enough with the author's work to know if his credentials merit it, but to me his tone is unbelievably snobbish and offputting.
He founded xiph.org, created the Ogg container, and helped write Vorbis and Daala. His creds are pretty much the best.
Edit: For a less-snobbish presentation, try watching his Digital Show & Tell video https://www.xiph.org/video/
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#7Such "studio" formats don't make sense for end-user listening, but they make sense as inputs to further processing, mixing, etc. Having a pile of headroom in frequency and amplitude means that after further processing you can subsequently output a sensible 16-bit 48kHz file without loss. If you start with a 16-bit 48kHz file and then do a pile of processing, you won't necessarily preserve the same degree of quality.
Most of the places selling these files don't include disclaimers about how the additional quality is only useful in studio conditions -- they use it as a differentiator in the marketplace for end listeners. The article does mention the need for higher quality in production environments:
> Also, there are (and always will be) reasons to use more than 16 bits in recording and production.
> None of that is relevant to playback; here 24 bit audio is as useless as 192kHz sampling. The good news is that at least 24 bit depth doesn't harm fidelity. It just doesn't help, and also wastes space.
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#8Why the title change? It is: "24/192 Music Downloads ...and why they make no sense"
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#9Such "studio" formats don't make sense for end-user listening, but they make sense as inputs to further processing, mixing, etc. Having a pile of headroom in frequency and amplitude means that after further processing you can subsequently output a sensible 16-bit 48kHz file without loss. If you start with a 16-bit 48kHz file and then do a pile of processing, you won't necessarily preserve the same degree of quality.
He mentions this specifically in the article several times. He agrees with you. The discussion is end-user listening.
Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly
#10I'm not familiar enough with the author's work to know if his credentials merit it, but to me his tone is unbelievably snobbish and offputting.
He knows what he is talking about. But I think his tone is somewhat snobbish because he is a little tired of the nonsense that is spread about music theory.