24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded!

[jdandy]

There is also a lot to be said for the various quality levels of mixing consoles, compressors and noise gates, reverb and harmony components, cabling, patchbays, microphones, and microphone preamplifiers, not to mention the quality differences applied by each sound engineer's methods of mastering for a to CD or SACD. The differences we hear at the consumer end of the digital chain are impacted by many audio components, software, and decisions long before it reaches our ears.

[bart]

You're so right Dan.
Sound engineers like Rudy Van Gelder (Blue Note) gave us material that, although it was recorded in the late fifties, still sounds way better than the majority of the U2 records.

[Jerome W]

This is what Norbert Clarisse, the founder of the french high end brand Audiomat says about 24 / 96 :

"When one listens to a regular cd ( 16 / 44.1 ), the 24 / 96 standard does not really influence the sound. But, what most people ignore is that, to comply with the norms of the 24 /96 standard, the makers of electronic components were forced to improve the performance of their components.Just an example : to match the 24 bits compatibility, Burr-Brown was forced to increase the signal to noise ratio of its converters. We went from 120 to 130 dB. But to improve the S / N ratio, they had to divide by ten the rate of distorsion. So these components are better, and they are the ones that make the difference in sound, and not the 24 / 96 standard by itself.

I found that rather interesting...

For those who speak french : " Lorsque l'on écoute un disque compact normal (16 bits/44.1 kHz), le standard 24 bits/96 kHz en lui-même n'y est pas pour grand-chose. Par contre, ce que les gens ne savent pas, c'est que, pour satisfaire au cahier des charges du standard 24 bits/96 kHz, les fabricants de composants électroniques ont dû améliorer les performances de leurs composants. Juste un exemple: pour annoncer une compatibilité 24 bits, Burr-Brown a été obligé d'améliorer le rapport signal/bruit de ses convertisseurs. On est passé ainsi de 120 à 130 dB. Mais, pour améliorer ce rapport signal/bruit, ils ont été obligés de diviser par dix le taux de distorsion. Donc ce cahier des charges 24/96 a imposé des composants plus performants. Et ce sont ces derniers qui font la différence et non pas le standard 24/96 en lui-même. A part cela, le Tango 2.5 utilise un étage d'entrée numérique ultra rapide qui fait la différence au niveau du Jitter. Ce dernier est considérablement réduit. Et je ne vous parle pas de l'optimisation à l'écoute de la carte analogique qui nous a pris plus de quatre mois."

[bart]

Merci Jérôme!

[Jerome W]

My pleasure bart !