I think you've got a good point, Rob, and a useful way of looking at the issue. Particularly, the extra bits help with arithmetic resolution and the elimination of errors. Similarly, extra bandwidth gives us many fewer errors at the boundaries of bandwidth that ARE audible. Along with that, as you note, the extra resolution makes it possible for DSP to function more effectively, and, yes, that seems to be audible. Keep in mind, though, it is at the expense of the total amount of DSP that can be applied. At the time of writing, that was still a fairly significant issue, particularly working in multitrack surround work.

Dave like the site good work; a little concerned about how to perceive the application of sample rates, why are you discussing sample rate frequency by comparing it to audio frequency in terms of pitch and human acoustic perception? That is not the actual use of the additional bandwidth surely? I believed it to be (for one purpose) a useful solution that provides (for example) DAWs with room to complete the complex algebraic summing that is required of them when mixing a great many channels of audio data with additional audio effects, plugins and other source data that may add to the complexity of what is essentially an incredibly complicated waveform. If you were to try and plot the same graph using cm squared paper it would render a much less detailed graph, is that not the point of the additional sample-rate resolution?

Kind Regards

Rob

Thanks, David!
Feels like the preasure levels become more transparent:)
Best wishes.
Dainius

I respect their hearing acuity because I've witnessed them working with their ears. I think that is valid. Nonetheless, you raise a good point - we all hear with our own ears and we have to learn to trust them, and calibrate them as best we can.

In general, what you suggest is probably true. Others' claims only reveal to us that somebody else "claimed" to hear something, and "may" have heard it. Beyond that, we don't really know anything.

Best regards,

Dave

I've been trying to come up with convincing demonstrations related to high sample rates and long data words. You can find my efforts here: http://www.pcabx.com/sample_rates/index.htm

Further, too many people I know whose hearing acuity I really respect have reported hearing things like a "BIIIIG" difference between 16-bit and 20-bit audio for me to say, "Nah, that's just group-think. They're making it up".

How do you respect someones hearing acuity? You can't use their hearing ability, you can only use your own. So the required respect couldn't come from experiencing that persons engineering skills, because you'd be using YOUR ears, not theirs. And whether or not their hearing is good in your opinion (thus leading to respect) comes from hearing their work through your own hearing acuity.

It isn't possible to respect someones hearing acuity, because you have no way of experiencing that. I tend to feel its more a case that you respect them as people, which should not have any place in determining these kind of issues.

In other words: You fell for a different kind of emperors clothes syndrome.

This site is like finding my perfect Les Paul. Incredible wealth of knowledge. Thanks for being open to midnight mixers like myself to explain why.