5 ms·

Newborns can hear a SNR of about 120dB which is around 21-bit. So 24-bit seems useless for playing back audio. But I always wonder how much of the sound we hea

by ohwp 12y ago

Newborns can hear a SNR of about 120dB which is around 21-bit. So 24-bit seems useless for playing back audio. But I always wonder how much of the sound we hear by feeling (skin, hair vibrations). Because maybe I can't hear 1Hz, but I can very well feel it.

lmm 12y ago
> Newborns can hear a SNR of about 120dB which is around 21-bit. So 24-bit seems useless for playing back audio. 21-bit would make for an awkward file format. If we can hear 17 bits of range that's enough to justify storing music as 24-bit.
valdiorn 12y ago
You can definitely "experience" the sub-audio range, but you don't need 24 bits to do that. I have very sensitive hearing, I hear things most others cannot. I can detect 192kbps vs 320kbps mp3 encoding. I cannot have any switch-mode AC/DC transformers in my bedroom because the switching noise actually keeps me awake (I charge my phone in the kitchen, most people think I'm mad when I complain about the "noise" :) Still, I've never been able to detect frequencies above 20Khz or hear the difference between 16 and 24 bit. I think anyone claiming to is full of crap.
- TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
  My laptop whines when I scroll down image-heavy pages. Thus far, I've had a grand total of one other person comment on it.
acjohnson55 12y ago
A lot of music is felt through the body. That's simply a result of low frequency at high levels. That's just one reason why live performance is a more dynamic experience than listening over headphones, but adding dynamic range won't create this effect over headphones. 24-bit is pretty much useless for playback. While human hearing range may extend past 16-bits of dynamic range, that doesn't mean that full range is musically useful. It is, however, quite useful to record and mix in 24-bit for the headroom.

5 ms·

Newborns can hear a SNR of about 120dB which is around 21-bit. So 24-bit seems useless for playing back audio. But I always wonder how much of the sound we hea

by ohwp 12y ago

lmm 12y ago
> Newborns can hear a SNR of about 120dB which is around 21-bit. So 24-bit seems useless for playing back audio. 21-bit would make for an awkward file format. If we can hear 17 bits of range that's enough to justify storing music as 24-bit.
valdiorn 12y ago
You can definitely "experience" the sub-audio range, but you don't need 24 bits to do that. I have very sensitive hearing, I hear things most others cannot. I can detect 192kbps vs 320kbps mp3 encoding. I cannot have any switch-mode AC/DC transformers in my bedroom because the switching noise actually keeps me awake (I charge my phone in the kitchen, most people think I'm mad when I complain about the "noise" :) Still, I've never been able to detect frequencies above 20Khz or hear the difference between 16 and 24 bit. I think anyone claiming to is full of crap.
- TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
  My laptop whines when I scroll down image-heavy pages. Thus far, I've had a grand total of one other person comment on it.
acjohnson55 12y ago
A lot of music is felt through the body. That's simply a result of low frequency at high levels. That's just one reason why live performance is a more dynamic experience than listening over headphones, but adding dynamic range won't create this effect over headphones. 24-bit is pretty much useless for playback. While human hearing range may extend past 16-bits of dynamic range, that doesn't mean that full range is musically useful. It is, however, quite useful to record and mix in 24-bit for the headroom.