As I said, it is indeed odd that the public desire to retain the pint only applies to draft beer, as served in bars. There is something rather nice and reassuring about the pint; it's a good thirst-quenching quantity without the beer going warm and dull by the time you get to the bottom. And a pint glass fits the average hand quite well.Oddly enough, bottles and cans are 500 ml
Yeah, 16/44 is somewhere between 95% and 100% of all the fidelity needed to equal human hearing audibility. It probably is more like 98% for anyone, and 100% for a majority of the people.
I've compared a whole lot of higher res music to 16/44 versions of the same masters.
I think the easiest and best way to prove to your self whether or not you can hear a difference is to take a 24/192 "real" hi-res file and dither it down to 16/44 and then ABX them in Foobar2000 and see if you can tell a difference. I have tried this and I can not. There is one trick though... if you turn the volume up super high before the music starts playing or between tracks you can sometimes hear extra noise in the 16/44 but it has no audibility when music is playing.
Quite, or the mic preamp anyway.P.S.: Yes, mics are all analogic and their SINAD is probably worse than our headset, I know that.
It's not just a question of who's listening, and the circumstances of the listening test. It's about the recordings themselves. How many recordings in your music collection have 96db dynamic range, or anything even approaching this? I'm guessing zero. How many are made from masters with a noise floor that's at 96db or lower? I'm guessing very few. How many are made from masters with significant musical or ambient acoustic information above 22khz? I'm guessing very few.
If you look at a spectral analysis of the ultrasonic frequencies in high res music, you see lots of stuff that looks like noise spikes—possibly from electronics problems, or HVAC systems, or squeaky tape rollers. Things that would really mess with your dog's enjoyment of the recording. They got onto the master because all the engineers involved are humans and so can't hear any of it.
Indeed it is the quality of the recording that really matter.
have any of you make a double blind test between
16/44
24/48
24/96
...
?
I did with speakers and headphones and couldn’t find appreciable results.
for sure much less rewarding than add rug carpet to absorb floor reflections.
Really curious to know, I have 46 years old ears.
My Best
So what do you do about the fact that hardly any real-world recording venue will have a ventilation noise floor better than -70dB… and that's the very best. Most will be considerably worse.Recording should have at least 130 dB of SINAD
I couldn't fathom that so much effort would go into something that would provide absolutely zero value.
There is value for the record companies and hardware manufacturers but not for consumers. Don't want to derail this thread with MQA but couldn't resist
We are testing here on ASR audio equipment having a SINAD of 120 dB and I see no reason to promote an obsolete 16-bits audio recording technology that might provide audio transparency only under perfect conditions (near 0dB recording peaks, a CD player with a SINAD higher than 90 dB etc.).So your premiss is faulty and everything else is non-sequitur
I am an engineer and I learned decades ago making something better than needed is stupid.We are testing here on ASR audio equipment having a SINAD of 120 dB and I see no reason to promote an obsolete 16-bits audio recording technology that might provide audio transparency only under perfect conditions (near 0dB recording peaks, a CD player with a SINAD higher than 90 dB etc.).
I personally see no reasons for feeding a 120 dB SINAD DAC with a 16/44 track if the same recording can be found at 24-bit resolution (although I am against 24/192, but I am pro 24/48).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against 16/44, but I will definitely not promote it, because I see no reasons to continue using an audio format that is technologically inferior to our current DACs and amps.
We are testing here on ASR audio equipment having a SINAD of 120 dB and I see no reason to promote an obsolete 16-bits audio recording technology that might provide audio transparency only under perfect conditions (near 0dB recording peaks, a CD player with a SINAD higher than 90 dB etc.).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against 16/44, but I will definitely not promote it, because I see no reasons to continue using an audio format that is technologically inferior to our current DACs and amps.