Jim Alfredson

That's cool!

I have been playing Fridays at a restaurant in the Detroit area lately. Not every Friday, but several. And we have to play so quiet that we are often drowned out by the regular conversations of the tables near us. So yes... we can play quietly if that's what is required. Hardly any organissimo gigs are miked with a PA and all that. We play acoustically in the room, albeit with two electric instruments (guitar and organ).

We raised about $700. Not too shabby!

It's definitely an estimation based on the dynamic range of vinyl which is only about 65db, maybe 70db if you really push it. Remember, bit depth is all about dynamic range. The dynamic range of 16bit audio is 96db. The dynamic range of 24bit is 144db. And remember that the decibel scale is logarithmic. So the difference between 96db and 144db is tremendous. The sampling rate determines the frequency range. Vinyl can actually reproduce supersonic frequencies above human hearing but that doesn't mean the needle, the phono pre, the amp, or the speakers can do so.

I dunno; the writer failed to sway me. Even if what he writes is correct, his sneering tone makes me think his mind has preconceived notions. Take this for example: "The CD-quality standard—which Young and HRA proponents say isn't sufficient—wasn't adopted randomly. It's not a number plucked out of thin air. It's based on sampling theory and the actual limits of human hearing. To the human ear, audio sampled above 44.1 kHz/16-bit is inaudibly different." But I remember reading that within a few years of the CD's introduction, people thought 16-bit was inadequate. That's why even vinyl remasterings in the '90's touted 20- and 24-bit mastering. Yes, but that increased bit depth was in the mixing / production stage, not the final output stage. The bit depth of vinyl is essentially about 12bits if one were to convert vinyl specs into the digital world. Whenever you are processing digital audio it's always wise to use a higher bit-rate but for the final product 16bits gives you a theoretical 96db of dynamic range, which is more than enough for almost all music. Even the most dynamic orchestral recording usually has a swing of around 70db before the noise floor of the venue, the microphones, the preamps, and everything else starts to become a factor. A sample rate of 44.1kHz is also more than enough. I've done a lot of experiments. I even released a Blu-Ray version of my THEO album with stereo mixes in 24bit / 96kHz but honestly they don't sound any better than the 16bit / 44.1kHz mixes on the regular CD. As I mentioned in another thread, the low end on the 16bit mixes is a bit more "solidified" which is something 16bit does for some reason. It's not necessarily better, just slightly different. The cool part about the Blu-Ray is the surround mixes, imo. The argument that higher sampling rates result in more detail has never made any sense. It also goes against human physiology. Our ears can only hear up to 20kHz but most people don't even have that much upper end left. Most of us can only hear up to 16kHz or so due to hearing damage or simply age. Then there are the microphones that are used to capture the music. The majority of microphones drop off precipitously at 20kHz. Even some of the best only go to about 22kHz or so. There are a few measurement mics that go up to 30kHz but the majority of microphones in the average recording studio's mic locker do not capture much above 20kHz. Most dynamic mics, which are often used on drums, horns, and vocals, usually roll off steeply at 15kHz! And let's not forget the mic preamps that must amplify the minuscule electrical signal from the mic. They too are rarely linear beyond 20kHz... because why should they be? We can't hear that stuff anyway! And if the microphone isn't picking it up due to it's limitations and the preamp isn't amplifying it due to it's limitations, then how is it going to be on the recording? ESPECIALLY older, pre-digital recordings! The frequency response of even the best, well-maintained tape machine back then was barely over 25kHz. The upper frequency limit of 96kHz audio according to the Nyquist theorem is 48kHz. That's over twice what our ears can actually hear. For 192kHz it's 96kHz!!!! It's completely pointless. It would be like a TV manufacturer making a TV that can output colors in the ultraviolet and soft x-ray parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. I don't care how good your eyes are, you cannot trump the physical bandwidth of your senses!