Miguelón
Active Member
Not added benefit from 16 bit to 24 on dynamic range?
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Serious Question: How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent? Are that many confused?
- Thread starter Willhelm_Scream
- Start date
Tell
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2024
- Messages
- 127
- Likes
- 166
Efficiency is _always_ nice imo! Why waste more bandwidth and storage than you need to?
Miguelón
Active Member
Love CD quality also, but think to standardize bitrate and sample rate and get simplicity with frame rates, a good music standard can be 24/48. I cannot tell if I hear the difference but may be also 48 kHz can allow easier resampling from 96 kHz masters than 44.1 kHz?
I have multiple DACs. A Schiit Modi 3, Schiit Modi+, Schiit Modius, Eversolo DAC-Z8 and the internal DACs in the Wiim Pro Plus, the Eversolo DMP-A6, Onkyo C-7030 CD Player, a Hiby R6 Gen 3 DAP, Galaxy S23 Ultra, Galaxy Tab S8+, Asus ChromeBox, Google PixelBook Go Chromebook, plus others I am sure.
I don't believe there is more than a 5% difference between the "best" and the "worst" and I know I couldn't pick any of them out in a blind test. They all do what they are supposed to do.
Is the Modi+ better than the Modi 3? Barely, in measurements. Can I hear a difference between them? No.
How about the supposed "best" one? The DAC-Z8 would probably qualify for that. It sounds just like the others. I got it for the extra features it has. Inputs, a nice eye candy screen , a remote for switching inputs and a built in headphone amp. Is it better as a DAC than the Schiit Modi+? Not really.
Can I hear any difference between the Wiim Pro Plus and the Eversolo DMP-A6 using their internal DACs? No, not unless I change the EQ parameters that both can do.
I don't believe there is more than a 5% difference between the "best" and the "worst" and I know I couldn't pick any of them out in a blind test. They all do what they are supposed to do.
Is the Modi+ better than the Modi 3? Barely, in measurements. Can I hear a difference between them? No.
How about the supposed "best" one? The DAC-Z8 would probably qualify for that. It sounds just like the others. I got it for the extra features it has. Inputs, a nice eye candy screen , a remote for switching inputs and a built in headphone amp. Is it better as a DAC than the Schiit Modi+? Not really.
Can I hear any difference between the Wiim Pro Plus and the Eversolo DMP-A6 using their internal DACs? No, not unless I change the EQ parameters that both can do.
Miguelón
Active Member
Yes, the more efficient the better.
But for me is quite audible, I did an online test that Ellebob sent with 6 tracks on 3 formats each (loseless, 320 kbps and 128 kbps) and was relatively easy for me to guess 4 of 6 which was the loseless track, even with apple earpods (cable, not airpods which are bluetooth).
Not a huge difference on 5 of the 6 tracks, I had to replay a couple of times but in classical was a children play to guess (is the right expression? I’m spanish).
Never tried blind between CD and DVD, I want to find a test to know if I can differentiate them
There are no human audible differences between 16/44.1khz and 24/48khz.
There was a Chinese guy who went to a domestic audio show, sneakily played 128kbps MP3s on a system and everyone was completely oblivious to it.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
for recordings ... sure as one has a huge dynamic range. That will be crushed (limited/compressed) so it still sounds good in reproduction at lower listening levels. When one normalizes that song/album to 0dBFS then 16 bits (dithered) will be more than enough.
On the playback side when using digital volume control it may pay to have 24bits.
Think about the differences between a 96db dynamic range vs a 144db range.
That means either a 96db or 144db difference between the quietest sounds in your music/audio vs the loudest. That is more than enough for any recorded music that I know of.
What is the normal quiet sound in your listening room? Mine is about 30db. Turning up my music so that the quietest parts are audible means those parts have to be played "louder" than 30db. Our highest available value is 96db. We have adjusted ~0db to 30db already. So any theoretical 96db sound will now be played at 30+96db. That is 126db. Listening to music at more than 95db for any length of time will damage your hearing.
So why do you think you or anyone else would benefit from 144db of dynamic range?
Last edited:
It is useful to do the original recording at 24bits. I don't think there is any benefit for playback.
Not an audible benefit in real world listening.
Miguelón
Active Member
Aha, ok. Thanks!
For any reason, most of Glenn Gould discography was recently released on 24 bits 44.1 kHz. I thought that was because sound quality, but maybe is just the master
Miguelón
Active Member
Thanks! I’m learning a lot on ASR, a ton of previous beliefs are falling down replaced by more rational ones, audiophile influence was turning me crazy
Marketing. People see 24 as better than 16.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
That -30dB noise floor is over the entire spectrum and if most of it is in the lower part of the spectrum it isn't the audible noise floor for mids/upper mids.
Consider that the dynamic range of human can handle is about 70-80dB.
This is not the same as being able to hear -5dB at 3kHz and 130dB (pain limit).
Play peaks at 100dB SPL and at 30dB peaks it is all silence one hears.
Play peaks at 120dB and about 40dB is the softest sound one can hear... that will be lower again when some time has passed without such loud peaks.
But yes, 16bits, dithered is more than enough and can reach over 96dB dynamic range. Think of dither as DSD in the smallest bit.
For recordings it pays to have 144dB (theoretically as the practical noise floor is in the way) as one can have a LOT of headroom recording loud sounds without the need of watching the peak meters not reaching 0dB and having to redo the recording after apologizing to the artists
Consider that the dynamic range of human can handle is about 70-80dB.
This is not the same as being able to hear -5dB at 3kHz and 130dB (pain limit).
Play peaks at 100dB SPL and at 30dB peaks it is all silence one hears.
Play peaks at 120dB and about 40dB is the softest sound one can hear... that will be lower again when some time has passed without such loud peaks.
But yes, 16bits, dithered is more than enough and can reach over 96dB dynamic range. Think of dither as DSD in the smallest bit.
For recordings it pays to have 144dB (theoretically as the practical noise floor is in the way) as one can have a LOT of headroom recording loud sounds without the need of watching the peak meters not reaching 0dB and having to redo the recording after apologizing to the artists
But for digital volume control it is fine when 16bits is upsampled to 24 or 32 bits as all modern DACS do.
Miguelón
Active Member
Many DACs descriptions enhance in capital letters 32/768 kHz resolution. Is there any domain when such a resolution may be justified?
While reading this and replying, I currently have Youtube Music playing their 256kbps Opus lossy compression and it sounds great.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
Yep that was my point exactly.
16bit recordings are fine.
They will remain 16 bit depth when a 24 bit DAC is used as digital volume control.
Of course here too the practical noise floor is in the way here too.
Miguelón
Active Member
This is because volume should be encoded on the digital signal and upsampling lets the place to extra methadata bits?
Similar threads
- Poll