Re: [linux-audio-user] Linux music editor, greater than 32-bit ?

From: Arnold Krille <arnold.krille@email-addr-hidden>
Date: Tue Feb 27 2007 - 11:43:39 EET

2007/2/26, Florin Andrei <florin@andrei.myip.org>:
> Vincent Jaubert wrote:
> > On 2/26/07, Florin Andrei <florin@andrei.myip.org> wrote:
> >> 24 bit means 135dB signal/noise ratio.
> >> I haven't seen yet analog gear capable of 135dB.
> > 24 bits is useful for processing. For the end user, 16 bits is enough.
> Right, keep an overhead while processing, while the requirements for
> delivery are lower.
>
> But I would argue that I'd like a tad more than 16bit for delivery.
> 20bit would give us around 115dB if I'm not mistaken. 22bit would be
> somewhere in the 120's. It would be nice to cover the whole dynamic
> range of the human ear, which is 120dB.

You have amps and speakers doing 120dB? Show them to me.

Most time when I try to reach that dynamic range (with my home stereo
or with a professional) PA I get several problems:
 - Neighbors banging on the door because of the loud passages in the music.
 - Listeners complaining about not hearing anything in a silent
passage after 2 minutes of 100dB.
 - To small mainlines to get the current for powering 120dB(A).
 - To small budget to be anywhere near 120dB dynamic range.

> Come to think of it, it's probably easier to just make it 24bit (3x8)
> and forget all the nitpicking. Let processing be done on 32bit and that
> would be it.

While 24bit or higher is nice for processing, the only reason I see
for more bits on the consumer-side is to have a higher SN-ratio. But
most consumer electronic is worse than noise of 16bit dac...

Arnold

-- 
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Wenn man mit Raubkopien Bands wie Brosis oder Britney Spears wirklich
verhindern könnte, würde ich mir noch heute einen Stapel Brenner und
einen Sack Rohlinge kaufen.
Received on Tue Feb 27 12:15:07 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 27 2007 - 12:15:07 EET