naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

2. Re: 16 Bit & 24 Bit recordings

Subject: 2. Re: 16 Bit & 24 Bit recordings
From: "Paul Jacobson" thebrunswicktwitcher
Date: Sun May 27, 2007 4:24 am ((PDT))
I'd intended to delete the last message but inadvertently hit send
instead.

apologies.
Paul

On 27/05/2007, at 9:01 PM, Paul Jacobson wrote:

>
> On 27/05/2007, at 7:25 PM, Phil Tyler wrote:
>
>> Giving you 8 bits, theoretically, more resolution of
>> low level sounds with 24 bits.
>>
>> Phil
>
> I suspect it's far more than 8 bits as that would imply 2^8 =3D 256
> additional "steps", whereas the actual difference is between 2^16 =3D
> 65,536 and 2^24 =3D 16,777,216.
>
> The page I posted a link to earlier in the week has this rather
> pertinent example:
>
> http://www.24bitfaq.org/#Q0_1_1
>
> "To elaborate further, each bit gives us the ability to represent
> about 6dB of dynamic range. A passage that is 6dB louder than another
> passage is said to be twice as loud as the other passage. In the 4-
> bit example, we theoretically have 24dB of dynamic range that can be
> used. But what if recording doesn=92t take advantage of all that
> dynamic range? What if the recording never peaks beyond 6dB of its
> maximum possible limit? In this case, the recording would only take
> advantage of 3 of what we call the least significant (or left-most)
> bits, meaning 18dB of dynamic range. 16-bit recordings are capable of
> a theoretical maximum limit of 96dB of dynamic range. This means that
> a single wave could have up to 65536 discrete values that can be used
> to represent it. But if the same wave recorded at 16-bit peaks at
> 48dB below its maximum possible limit, then there would only be 256
> discrete values that can be used to represent it, taking advantage of
> only 8 of the least significant bits. The 8 most significant bits
> would contain no information whatsoever, and would remain unused. In
> the case of 24-bit recording, you=92d have a maximum of 16,777,216
> values to choose from, and in the case of a wave peaking at 48dB
> below its maximum possible limit, the wave would still have 65536
> possible discrete amplitude values that could be used to represent
> it."
>
>
>
>
> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
> Krause
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

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