Correlation between sample rate and audible frequency?

[ReaderZ]

probably

however, this claim is based on some assumptions about audibility and AFAIK that have never been carefully tested

the best analysis of claims that higher bit rates/depth can be audible is that by Reiss

I would however bet a LOT of money that bit rate/depth even if audible on the finest system, by the best-trained and youngest human listeners will not be the most or even 2nd or 3rd most important changes one should make in one's own system.

I have done some more reading on these since my last post, and I am sure I can't even hear 18khz now, so 44.1khz is enough , however 24 bit may still be nice if you have the right recording and ideal listening condition.

 

[Julf]

I have done some more reading on these since my last post, and I am sure I can't even hear 18khz now, so 44.1khz is enough , however 24 bit may still be nice if you have the right recording and ideal listening condition.

I would love to come across a recording (or listening room) with more than 96 dB dynamic range...

 

[Frank Dernie]

I have done some more reading on these since my last post, and I am sure I can't even hear 18khz now, so 44.1khz is enough , however 24 bit may still be nice if you have the right recording and ideal listening condition.

I have never come across music with a dynamic range needing more than 16 bits in over 50 years of recording.
Also, if you consider it from the "hairy arsed engineer" point of view (sorry for the language but I consider it amusing slang from the sector I worked in all my career) look at the following reasoning.
Imagine you did have a recording with the full 16-bits of dynamic range and you wanted to listen to it at home. The background noise in my very quiet room is 30dB so if I set my volume so the quiet bits of the music are at this level at my listening position so I can definitely hear them (one can hear some frequencies lower than the background noise) the peaks will be at 126dB.
That is hearing-damage level but not only that 99% of speakers, maybe more, wouldn't be able to achieve it and nor would 99%+ of amplifiers.
No sane supplier of recordings would release a mix that no customer would have the equipment to play IMO.
LPs are around 11-bit maximum and some enthusiasts like them so much they consider them more enjoyable than CDs, so 11-bit is certainly enough for a lot of people.

 

[tuga]

I have never come across music with a dynamic range needing more than 16 bits in over 50 years of recording.
Also, if you consider it from the "hairy arsed engineer" point of view (sorry for the language but I consider it amusing slang from the sector I worked in all my career) look at the following reasoning.
Imagine you did have a recording with the full 16-bits of dynamic range and you wanted to listen to it at home. The background noise in my very quiet room is 30dB so if I set my volume so the quiet bits of the music are at this level at my listening position so I can definitely hear them (one can hear some frequencies lower than the background noise) the peaks will be at 126dB.
That is hearing-damage level but not only that 99% of speakers, maybe more, wouldn't be able to achieve it and nor would 99%+ of amplifiers.
No sane supplier of recordings would release a mix that no customer would have the equipment to play IMO.
LPs are around 11-bit maximum and some enthusiasts like them so much they consider them more enjoyable than CDs, so 11-bit is certainly enough for a lot of people.

To illustrate your point, listening to the Proms in the car means that I have to be riding the volume button all the time (one could call it manual dynamic compression).

 

[Frank Dernie]

To illustrate your point, listening to the Proms in the car means that I have to be riding the volume button all the time (one could call it manual dynamic compression).

I gave up listening to high quality music in my car for this very reason. Highly compressed radio stations and awful-sounding-at-home recordings are order of the day in a car IME.
I actually usually gave the "radio" off when driving, it allows me to use my senses better for driving safely.

 

[ReaderZ]

I have never come across music with a dynamic range needing more than 16 bits in over 50 years of recording.
Also, if you consider it from the "hairy arsed engineer" point of view (sorry for the language but I consider it amusing slang from the sector I worked in all my career) look at the following reasoning.
Imagine you did have a recording with the full 16-bits of dynamic range and you wanted to listen to it at home. The background noise in my very quiet room is 30dB so if I set my volume so the quiet bits of the music are at this level at my listening position so I can definitely hear them (one can hear some frequencies lower than the background noise) the peaks will be at 126dB.
That is hearing-damage level but not only that 99% of speakers, maybe more, wouldn't be able to achieve it and nor would 99%+ of amplifiers.
No sane supplier of recordings would release a mix that no customer would have the equipment to play IMO.
LPs are around 11-bit maximum and some enthusiasts like them so much they consider them more enjoyable than CDs, so 11-bit is certainly enough for a lot of people.

I think that's where close headphone and IEM comes in, if background is 30db and these can block close to 30 db, you basically have close to 0db of background noise, so that might be a thing?

 

[maverickronin]

I think that's where close headphone and IEM comes in, if background is 30db and these can block close to 30 db, you basically have close to 0db of background noise, so that might be a thing?

1mW will get plenty of them to 115dB or greater too.

One hell of a niche market though.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I think that's where close headphone and IEM comes in, if background is 30db and these can block close to 30 db, you basically have close to 0db of background noise, so that might be a thing?

Yes but I find a short line of tiny musicians in my head so totally artificial and unconvincing I don't notice any other shortcoming personally.

 

[Frgirard]

I have done some more reading on these since my last post, and I am sure I can't even hear 18khz now, so 44.1khz is enough , however 24 bit may still be nice if you have the right recording and ideal listening condition.

24 bit is 8 empty bit. No records on this planet contain more than 80 dB.
The loudness war recording could be use with 5 bit.
20.log (2exp5) =30dB

We cannot here up fmax =22 kHz and when we are young.
The Shannon theorem has define fo=2xfmax
Nyquist has established fo=44,1kHz.

In pro the fo has been set at 48kHz.
Is someone know why?

The rest is audiophile legends and the hi-res labels are a snake oil.

 

[Frgirard]

A survey on the high sample rate vs the red book.
https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.php?p=15405039&postcount=28

 

[j_j]

Yes but I find a short line of tiny musicians in my head so totally artificial and unconvincing I don't notice any other shortcoming personally.

That's not a necessary problem with headphones.

 

[Frank Dernie]

That's not a necessary problem with headphones.

It is the problem for me with all headphones I have tried over the last 50 years. My first pair were Koss electrostatics, bought on my first trip abroad as an exchange student to the USA in 1970. I have tried shed loads of headphones since, and being poor at selling stuff, still have about a dozen but I find the in the head micro-orchestra or micro-band impossible to actually like, as opposed to tolerate on a bus or plane.

 

[Blumlein 88]

That's not a necessary problem with headphones.

So how does one fix it? I've the same problem.

 

[j_j]

https://immersion.net/ Well, look at "products". Yes, this is 3 days into first release. Yes, I know the guts of it. Amir, if you don't want this here, go ahead pull it.

 

[pma]

I think there have been already more attempts to fix the above mentioned issue of headphones listening impression. We shall see if this would succeed or not, only time will tell.

However, the physical impression of direct feel of low frequencies through human body is probably impossible to create by any SW, so it will remain the headphone listening effect, with some improvement of more natural spacious impression.

 

[solderdude]

https://immersion.net/ Well, look at "products". Yes, this is 3 days into first release. Yes, I know the guts of it. Amir, if you don't want this here, go ahead pull it.

Does it require access to multitrack recording access or is it smart software that can detect signatures from instruments in stereo recordings and apply 'spatial' effects for each 'instrument' for headphones/IEM's ?

 

[UKPI]

https://immersion.net/ Well, look at "products". Yes, this is 3 days into first release. Yes, I know the guts of it. Amir, if you don't want this here, go ahead pull it.

Based on the description, it looks like a 3D mixing tool for headphones. Would you care to explain more about the "guts" of this software? Can it be used on conventional stereo material?

 

[Frank Dernie]

https://immersion.net/ Well, look at "products". Yes, this is 3 days into first release. Yes, I know the guts of it. Amir, if you don't want this here, go ahead pull it.

Is this similar to the Smyth Realiser software?
Following glowing reports I got close to buying one earlier this year for sound surround for films but before paying the dosh I watched a whole film whilst listening to the sound on headphones and decided that however effective it was I wouldn't like the experience enough.
I suppose it is a personal thing.