What kind of system do you need to appreciate 24bit music

[theflyingwasp]

I've taken the 1080p image as far as I can with my tv and Blu ray player .i doubt there is a finer hd image on the planet apart from 4k etc I don't say this to beat on my chest but I find the whole music thing I bit more complicated.

with varying hifi systems and speakers going up to tens of thousands of pounds what do the audiophiles listen to? I kinda understand that the human ear isn't really good enough to get the full benifet of 24bit music but do you have to spent a fortune to get a very good sound perfect music system.

i know this can go into funny money when you start with room treatment for sound aswell but for instance one of my favourite bands is Coldplay to hear the album a rush of blood to the head or XnY at it's very best in the home where do you begin?

 

[Thompsonuxb]

its down to preference....

Some like a detailed, seperated sound aka clinical, Some like a more 'muddled' sound aka warm. Some enjoy their music undynamic aka neutral.

its finding something you can enjoy yourself.

I mean some just enjoy new kit (I myself love the smell of a new amp burning in) and have the cash to 'upgrade' etc.

best place to start is consider the room and the speakers you'll need to fill it with sound and then an amp capable of driving those speakers with room filling sound. the source needs to be quality though and careful consideration fot the quality of the interconnects between your kit - speaker cables...... tough one, that can get silly, so buy the best you can afford for the length you need and commit to them as your point of reference in your system.

and see how you get on.

 

[Esra]

where do you begin?

Imo room is the most important;you can get best if your room is treated according to the speakers .But also a not optimal treated room will be more capable to get out the best of the speakers than any electronic device (except dsp) can do.You dont have to spend a fortune for that, just buy nice furniture ,carpets and curtains.A high end speaker will never sound good in a poor room but a entry level speaker can may satisfy your needs in a nice room,depends on your needs and your pocket.

 

[MajorFubar]

The biggest contributing factor is often the mastering quality of the music itself, not the bit-depth or bit-rate you're listening in. I once tried listening to Coldplay on Spotify when Mylo Xyloto appeared on it. It was recommended to me by a guy at work who is a big Coldplay fan. I got 35 seconds into 'Hurts Like Heaven' and turned it off. I just couldn't stand torturing myself with the dynamically-crucified noise any longer. Shame because I don't doubt that they're a talented band, but I just found it utterly unlistenable.

 

[Tarxman]

It's going to sound a bit silly, but at the point you can hear it really. I've recently got onto HD Tracks myself and have bought a few high Rez albums. I can hear a huge improvement in the sound when compared to iTunes downloads and even cd.

If you have two variations of the same album I.e. One in 16/44.1 and a high rez 24/96 or 24/192, take them both to a local dealer and test amps, DACs and speakers and find out for yourself where you hear the difference.

 

[davedotco]

I've taken the 1080p image as far as I can with my tv and Blu ray player .i doubt there is a finer hd image on the planet apart from 4k etc I don't say this to beat on my chest but I find the whole music thing I bit more complicated.

with varying hifi systems and speakers going up to tens of thousands of pounds what do the audiophiles listen to? I kinda understand that the human ear isn't really good enough to get the full benifet of 24bit music but do you have to spent a fortune to get a very good sound perfect music system.

i know this can go into funny money when you start with room treatment for sound aswell but for instance one of my favourite bands is Coldplay to hear the album a rush of blood to the head or XnY at it's very best in the home where do you begin?

Unless you are spending megabucks, hi-fi is a compromise.

The trick is to work out which aspects of hi-fi reproduction is most important to you.

This is not easy, you need to put all the hi-fi speak and hi-fi 'values' out with the garbage and work out what you want to hear when you play music.

Mrs DDC is a big Coldplay fan and, the dreadful 'Fix you' apart, I think they are quite decent. The question is when you play them, what are you looking to hear?

I have no idea what will work for you, but for me, playing virtually any kind of rock music, I require a sense of 'presence', ie the shear punch and attack of rock music should be portrayed as well as possible within the confines of a home environment, to me everything else comes second.

Now again, for me, this is best delivered, at the budget end of the price spectrum, by an active speaker system. In the matters that I consider important, conventional, passive systems do not even come close.

At higher price levels the use of valve amplification, with suitable speakers, comes into play. The best examples deliver all the 'presence' that I need, with an additional sense of refinement and 'musical' connection. (hard to describe)

Such systems may not actually reproduce what you hear at the front of a rock gig, but they are evocative of what 'being there' actually sounds like, and that is a very good trick.

 

[Esra]

Unless you are spending megabucks, hi-fi is a compromise.

Is it not a compromise even you are spending megabucks?

 

[Thompsonuxb]

I've taken the 1080p image as far as I can with my tv and Blu ray player .i doubt there is a finer hd image on the planet apart from 4k etc I don't say this to beat on my chest but I find the whole music thing I bit more complicated.

with varying hifi systems and speakers going up to tens of thousands of pounds what do the audiophiles listen to? I kinda understand that the human ear isn't really good enough to get the full benifet of 24bit music but do you have to spent a fortune to get a very good sound perfect music system.

i know this can go into funny money when you start with room treatment for sound aswell but for instance one of my favourite bands is Coldplay to hear the album a rush of blood to the head or XnY at it's very best in the home where do you begin?

Unless you are spending megabucks, hi-fi is a compromise.

The trick is to work out which aspects of hi-fi reproduction is most important to you.

This is not easy, you need to put all the hi-fi speak and hi-fi 'values' out with the garbage and work out what you want to hear when you play music.

Mrs DDC is a big Coldplay fan and, the dreadful 'Fix you' apart, I think they are quite decent. The question is when you play them, what are you looking to hear?

I have no idea what will work for you, but for me, playing virtually any kind of rock music, I require a sense of 'presence', ie the shear punch and attack of rock music should be portrayed as well as possible within the confines of a home environment, to me everything else comes second.

Now again, for me, this is best delivered, at the budget end of the price spectrum, by an active speaker system. In the matters that I consider important, conventional, passive systems do not even come close.

At higher price levels the use of valve amplification, with suitable speakers, comes into play. The best examples deliver all the 'presence' that I need, with an additional sense of refinement and 'musical' connection. (hard to describe)

Such systems may not actually reproduce what you hear at the front of a rock gig, but they are evocative of what 'being there' actually sounds like, and that is a very good trick.

o.k Davedotco I get it, its saturday night and we can all do with a good 'blow out' to get rid of tensions built up during the week, but c'mon there is no need to drop the active passive bomb so soon - I mean good grief man, whats wrong with you?

 

[davedotco]

Unless you are spending megabucks, hi-fi is a compromise.

Is it not a compromise even you are spending megabucks?

Nope.

Given the money for the right equipment and the space to put it in it is not.

 

[davedotco]

I've taken the 1080p image as far as I can with my tv and Blu ray player .i doubt there is a finer hd image on the planet apart from 4k etc I don't say this to beat on my chest but I find the whole music thing I bit more complicated.

with varying hifi systems and speakers going up to tens of thousands of pounds what do the audiophiles listen to? I kinda understand that the human ear isn't really good enough to get the full benifet of 24bit music but do you have to spent a fortune to get a very good sound perfect music system.

i know this can go into funny money when you start with room treatment for sound aswell but for instance one of my favourite bands is Coldplay to hear the album a rush of blood to the head or XnY at it's very best in the home where do you begin?

Unless you are spending megabucks, hi-fi is a compromise.

The trick is to work out which aspects of hi-fi reproduction is most important to you.

This is not easy, you need to put all the hi-fi speak and hi-fi 'values' out with the garbage and work out what you want to hear when you play music.

Mrs DDC is a big Coldplay fan and, the dreadful 'Fix you' apart, I think they are quite decent. The question is when you play them, what are you looking to hear?

I have no idea what will work for you, but for me, playing virtually any kind of rock music, I require a sense of 'presence', ie the shear punch and attack of rock music should be portrayed as well as possible within the confines of a home environment, to me everything else comes second.

Now again, for me, this is best delivered, at the budget end of the price spectrum, by an active speaker system. In the matters that I consider important, conventional, passive systems do not even come close.

At higher price levels the use of valve amplification, with suitable speakers, comes into play. The best examples deliver all the 'presence' that I need, with an additional sense of refinement and 'musical' connection. (hard to describe)

Such systems may not actually reproduce what you hear at the front of a rock gig, but they are evocative of what 'being there' actually sounds like, and that is a very good trick.

o.k Davedotco I get it, its saturday night and we can all do with a good 'blow out' to get rid of tensions built up during the week, but c'mon there is no need to drop the active passive bomb so soon - I mean good grief man, whats wrong with you?

I simply described what works for me. No agenda, no suggestion that it would work for the op. Just an example of focusing on the things that are important, in this case to me.

You need to get some perspective and look at posts in context.

 

[Leeps]

Agreeing with the aforementioned commeńts about the quality of the mastering, the benefits of 24-bit sound can be heard fairly quickly as you move up the food chain. My AV system's very midrange cost-wise, but listening to the 24-bit DTS-Master Audio Bluray of Beck's Sea Change today was a significant step-up from the CD.

I found it particularly interesting that as the song-writing itself tails off a bit towards the latter end of the album, the Bluray's quality demanded that I remain riveted to my sofa to listen to the SOUNDS as much as the MUSIC, particularly as the mastering seemed to make creative use of all available channels rather than just an afterthought. I thoroughly enjoyed myself I did.

It's noteworthy that with good mp3's and CD's, I've felt that my AV system gives away about 5-10% in outright sound quality to my old stereo hifi. But with the hi-res Bluray Audios I've purchased so far, I no longer feel the AV system's on the back foot; rather it leaps forward to produce effects and tricks with my ears that are well-beyond what my old hifi could achieve.

My only gripe is the lack of Bluray Audios available & the fact that more than half the available catalogue is of albums made 40 years ago and beyond. Why they can't release BD Audios of more receńt well-produced albums is beyond me. I'd love to listen to Rodrigo y Gabriela, The Unthanks, Nitin Sawnhey, London Grammar, the XX, Radiohead or even Daft Punk's Tron Legacy soundtrack in full fat 24/96 5.1 mixes. But methinks I'll have to wait a łong time.

 

[Esra]

I dont want to split hair but reproduction stays reproduction,it is not the real thing.You can get close to it but there is still a lot of way... Thats of course only in my humble opinion,besides the fact only few have the megabucks if you are speaking about rigs up to six digits.I am sure,no i know, even such a system would let the owner think about what he can do better.Never ending story because it is not real and space at home is limited.But it is nice to have,no doubt.

 

[lindsayt]

Unless you are spending megabucks, hi-fi is a compromise.

Is it not a compromise even you are spending megabucks?

Nope.

Given the money for the right equipment and the space to put it in it is not.

Oh yes it is!

With hi-fi you get to the stage - especially with speakers where you change one thing to improve one aspect of the sound quality and you inevitably introduce compromises in other areas.

Davedotco is welcome to nominate a megabucks system that he thinks has no sonic compromises. I bet you I can tell you, easy peasy, where at least some compromises are.

 

[theflyingwasp]

Having read all the comments is money the real problem here or just each to their own .

the £20000 Cyrus anniversary system was quite the eye catcher for me .going from my ruark set up and running my imac through the Bluetooth speakers to the Cyrus set up with well chosen speakers is that all the average joe will ever need or is it just my ignorance to suggest that because it cost so much it is going to sound so good.i mean is ruark even respected amongst you guys ( don't feel the need to be nice here) it sounds very good to me even more so with my favourite songs coming through my £300 Bluetooth speakers but room dimensions and treatment aside that Cyrus set up with appropriate speakers must sound phenomenal ........ Or does it?

 

[Superaintit]

Having read all the comments is money the real problem here or just each to their own .

the £20000 Cyrus anniversary system was quite the eye catcher for me .going from my ruark set up and running my imac through the Bluetooth speakers to the Cyrus set up with well chosen speakers is that all the average joe will ever need or is it just my ignorance to suggest that because it cost so much it is going to sound so good.i mean is ruark even respected amongst you guys ( don't feel the need to be nice here) it sounds very good to me even more so with my favourite songs coming through my £300 Bluetooth speakers but room dimensions and treatment aside that Cyrus set up with appropriate speakers must sound phenomenal ........ Or does it?

Money is not the problem; choosing what's right for you is what matters.

Given my own experience with 24 bit records I think ( not sure) it sounds smoother.

To get the best out of hifi I would recommend:

-to listen to a few hifi sets to get an idea of what can be achieved. Try to find a benchmark.

-then set a maximum budget you're willing to spend (adjust when necessary and worth it)

-finally: buy the complete system as package (no future upgrades in mind).

This kept me happier in the long run and will most probably save you money.

Imo I could start to appreciate at a price starting from the pmc gb1i. They are speakers that gave me that feeling of joy that hifi can.

as a final note: buying from a dealer a display model can save you hundreds to a few thousend.

 

[andyjm]

with varying hifi systems and speakers going up to tens of thousands of pounds what do the audiophiles listen to? I kinda understand that the human ear isn't really good enough to get the full benifet of 24bit music but do you have to spent a fortune to get a very good sound perfect music system.

Your ears aren't good enough to get the full benefit of 16bit music, so 8 more bits (from a technical perspective) are a complete waste. However, you may find that a bit more care (and a bit less compression) has been applied to 'HiRes' 24/96 recordings, so you end up with a better listening experience - not because of the format, but because of the content.

If you want to go and compare, make sure you start with the same source material - get a 24 bit recording and downsample a 16 bit copy yourself (there are many apps to do this). You will then be comparing apples and apples. I was unable to tell the difference between 16 and 24 bits when I compared copies I made myself.

 

[matt49]

If you want to go and compare, make sure you start with the same source material - get a 24 bit recording and downsample a 16 bit copy yourself (there are many apps to do this). You will then be comparing apples and apples. I was unable to tell the difference between 16 and 24 bits when I compared copies I made myself.

If this kind of test interests you, try this out:

http://archimago.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/internet-test-24-bit-vs-16-bit-audio.html

Matt

 

[theflyingwasp]

From the comments above what exactly is the point of 24bit music? James Taylor has a kickstarter project called Ponomusic to give people 24bit so apple hit back with possibly giving people 24bit through iTunes .is it all just a waste of time and money if 16bit is good enough?

 

[MajorFubar]

If an album has been recorded, mixed and mastered at 24bit 96kHz (though many are recorded much higher than that), there is an argument that distributing it at 24/96 avoids any potential artefacts created by downsampling it to 16/44. These are unavoidable to a certain extent given that mathematically the numbers aren't precisely divisible. A process called 'dithering' reduces the effect of this as much as possible (and there's many different variations of dithering as well, all of which do it slightly differently). But it has nothing to do with 16/44 not being good enough to start with. Beyond a certain threshold (which 16/44 easily meets), the biggest contributor is the quality of the master not the resolution of the distributed file. It just seems to be that some HD downloads are mastered better than their 16/44 counterparts.

 

[spiny norman]

James Taylor has a kickstarter project called Ponomusic

Neil Young, dear, Neil Young

 

[CnoEvil]

From the comments above what exactly is the point of 24bit music? James Taylor has a kickstarter project called Ponomusic to give people 24bit so apple hit back with possibly giving people 24bit through iTunes .is it all just a waste of time and money if 16bit is good enough?

IMO. 24 bit often sounds better, though this may well be due to extra care taken over the mastering. I do not feel it is worth the extra over (well mastered) 16 bit......but it will be worth considering if it ever loses its premium.

 

[steve_1979]

IMO. 24 bit often sounds better, though this may well be due to extra care taken over the mastering.

:O

I will cherish this moment for the rest of my life.

 

[CnoEvil]

IMO. 24 bit often sounds better, though this may well be due to extra care taken over the mastering.

:O

I will cherish this moment for the rest of my life.

Please note the use of the words "may well", which still leaves room for doubt!

 

[theflyingwasp]

Sorry I ment Neil young

so are everybody's favourite songs and albums available in 24bit? Or is it selected music.those serious about their music is cd still king? I mean 1080p downloads are a farce bit is a different matter when downloading or streaming high quality music?

 

[nara]

Forget the system. Get yourself some Golden Ears.