apple to launch HD music

I'm with james.miller, going to 24bit audio is pointless with the vast majority of modern records, simply because the mastering barely makes use of 16bit, let alone 24bit.

I'm not an expert on this, but I read that 24bit audio makes a difference with music that has incredible dynamic range, something most modern recordings certainly do not have.
 
24 bit is overkill for any audio. 24bit allows a maximum dynamic range of 144db which is LOUD, we're talking the equivalent of a jet aircraft from 50m loud. You dont need that sort of dynamic range. I dont really know why 24bit because a standard. I can understand that 16bit isnt quite enough (maximum range of about 96db, which isnt enough for home theatre audio) but 24 bit is odd ball. i would have thought 20bit would be sufficient.
 
Last edited:
The majority of recordings can only be made in 16 or 24 bit though, when recording to a software DAW.
 
In the age of fast internet speeds, cheap large hard drives ... there is no harm in using full quality
 
james.miller said:
waste of time. fix the mastering issues, not the format its sold in. it's just a money grabbing exercise by apple.
Click to expand...
I agree, 24 bit offers huge dynamic range, but so much modern music is mastered for a mobile phone speaker, so way too much dynamic compression is used... :(

Hopefully the mastering engineers will be a little more reserved with the compressors on the 24 bit files... What's the point in massive dynamic range if it's not going to be used?
 
MikeHunt79 said:
I agree, 24 bit offers huge dynamic range, but so much modern music is mastered for a mobile phone speaker, so way too much dynamic compression is used... :(

Hopefully the mastering engineers will be a little more reserved with the compressors on the 24 bit files... What's the point in massive dynamic range if it's not going to be used?
Click to expand...

It depends on who's done the mastering really. One of the Elbow albums had a little logo on it and some blurb about how it had been mastered to use a decent dynamic range and so on.

Some people are still mastering things properly.
 
vonhelmet said:
Pay attention. That's basically what they're doing.
Click to expand...

maybe i wasnt paying attention either, but i cant see anywhere within that article that states they will be releasing flac audio. It only mentions 24bit audio.

i dont think your reply was particularly warranted.

It depends on who's done the mastering really. One of the Elbow albums had a little logo on it and some blurb about how it had been mastered to use a decent dynamic range and so on.

Some people are still mastering things properly.
Click to expand...

and what percentage of the market would that be?
 
james.miller said:
maybe i wasnt paying attention either, but i cant see anywhere within that article that states they will be releasing flac audio. It only mentions 24bit audio.

i dont think your reply was particularly warranted.
Click to expand...

Maybe I was a bit harsh... I read something about it elsewhere, but that article is thin on detail.

24 bit lossless apparently.

james.miller said:
and what percentage of the market would that be?
Click to expand...

About as large a percentage of the market as correlates to the percentage of buyers who care one iota. Supply and demand innit.
 
aaah ok then :)

While a move to 24-bit for iTunes, Amazon and 7Digital would be great, it would provide something of a headache for Apple. Because although Macs can throw out 24-bit audio, iOS devices can’t. That means we could see 24-bit support coming to the iPad 2 and iPhone 5, with Cupertino looking to get a jump on its rivals.
Click to expand...

headache, or a business opportunity ? ;)

'coming soon, new iphone 5 with HD lossless audio support'
 
james.miller said:
24 bit is overkill for any audio. 24bit allows a maximum dynamic range of 144db which is LOUD, we're talking the equivalent of a jet aircraft from 50m loud. You dont need that sort of dynamic range. I dont really know why 24bit because a standard. I can understand that 16bit isnt quite enough (maximum range of about 96db, which isnt enough for home theatre audio) but 24 bit is odd ball. i would have thought 20bit would be sufficient.
Click to expand...

Loudness decibals and dynamic range decibals are not the same thing.
 
banja said:
Loudness decibals and dynamic range decibals are not the same thing.
Click to expand...

i never said they were. but the dynamic range of 24bit pcm IS 144db so whatever way you look at it, 24bit pcm can represent anything from the quietest sound to something like a jet aircraft at 50m. Its just not needed.
 
Last edited:
james.miller said:
i never said they were. but the dynamic range of 24bit pcm IS 144db so whatever way you look at it, 24bit pcm can represent anything from the quietest sound to something like a jet aircraft at 50m. Its just not needed.
Click to expand...

Dynamic range has nothing to do with representing loudness. Decibel is just a measuring term which gets used for both loudness measuring and dynamic range measuring. They aren't related in that manner.

An 8 bit sound file could represent a jet aircraft. But if you want to represent a jet aircraft at 144db you'd need quite a hefty PA which could reproduce it. Bit depths are simply the resolution of dynamic range, that range using db as it's measurement unit. Loudness db is another thing altogether.
 
Last edited:
YES I KNOW THAT!:p


we're talking about the dynamic range of the source material here, not anything else. besides, what you have said (which i know) only serves to reinforce what i originally said - that the dynamic range of 24bit is complete overkill. i think we are all aware that the final output volume is governed by the volumn knob and not the source material.
 
Last edited:
james.miller said:
YES I KNOW THAT!


we're talking about the dynamic range of the source material here, not anything else. besides, what you have said (which i know) only serves to reinforce what i originally said - that the dynamic range of 24bit is complete overkill. i think we are all aware that the final output volume is governed by the volumn knob and not the source material.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I misunderstood.

Thing is, 8 bit audio can represent anything from the quietest sound to the loudest jet engine. Higher bit depths aren't unnecessary, they just have a higher resolution.

Delicate music with a lot of dynamics definitely benefits from 24 bit recording. Rock music etc not so much.
 
As everyone else has said as long as the record companies persist with headache enducing everything louder than everything else mastering then 24 bit audio is pretty pointless. Sadly the market is no longer interested in quality just quantity and price hence the massive number of people still happily downloading the same shoddy 128Kbps MP3's that hav been floating round the web since the napster days.
 
Call me a pedant, but are there any papers out there showing the benefit to the human ear of a recording in 24 bit vs. one mastered in 16bit in a real life situation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom