| Subject: | Re: 16 bit vs 24 bit Information Theory Hypothesis |
|---|---|
| From: | "Martyn Stewart" mijdog2000 |
| Date: | Sat May 26, 2007 7:49 pm ((PDT)) |
>>>Something unclear on the concept. It is not "upsampling"or "downsampling" - those terms refer to sample rate, not bit depth. You "dither it down" (or truncate it) to 16 from 24, and if you import a 16bit file to a 24 bit app, it simply adds 8 zeros. But when you do even the simplest proecss on it - even change level a tenth of a dB, it will be 24bit and need dither to go to 16 again. It is not conversion at all. Wrong term!<<<<<< I thought you said you were "slapping your hands" to not get back into this debate, Lou!!!! OH-MY-GOD the temptation is killing!!!!!! Martyn **************************************** Martyn Stewart Bird and Animal Sounds Digitally Recorded at: http://www.naturesound.org Redmond. Washington. USA N47.65543 W121.98428 e-mail: Tel: 425-898-0462 Make every Garden a wildlife Habitat! |
| Previous by Date: | Re: 16 bit vs 24 bit Information Theory Hypothesis, Martyn Stewart |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Backpacking Solutions Revisited - Pop editing, Steve Pelikan |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 16 bit vs 24 bit Information Theory Hypothesis, Martyn Stewart |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 16 bit vs 24 bit Information Theory Hypothesis, Walter Knapp |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU