definitive definition of high definition

[Fitzcaraldo215]

I think added bit depth has two faces. It is hard indeed to make a case for it techically on playback of a CD, whose playback bit depth, especially properly dithered, is more than adequate for home listening. However, recording engineers I have spoken to, no doubt a small sample, value the added headroom that accompanies added bit depth across the various recording, mixing and mastering processing stages through a variety of equipment. Obviously, true 24 bit depth is not realistically achievable on recording or playback. But, at least some of those added bits are useable in extending low level detail above the noise.

I witnessed a very hirez, Mch classical recording session in the control room several years ago, and I was surprised to see that all the mic feeds were totally wide open, each capturing maximum S/N. Obviously, on mixing and mastering, individual channels would be comparatively adjusted proportionately to achieve a proper, "artistic" sense of sonic balance. I did not witness the final mixing/mastering process. But, in no case would low level dynamics become lost in the noise in the final mix or mastering as final production sound level, EQ or other adjustments were made due to the headroom provided by the added bit depth in the production chain.

Even before that, I believed, and still do, that one advantage to hirez was better capture and playback of low level audio detail in the signal. Much of this advantage can still be obtained by hirez 24 bit recording and production for CD then carefully fitting maximum hi and lo level dynamics of the hirez master into the slightly reduced 16 bit plus dither capacity of CD's bucket size. (I am especially not talking about dynamically compressed, loudness wars music, which is a different matter.) But, I don't think recordings captured, then mixed and mastered at 16 bit depth enjoy the same advantage in retaining low level detail through the production chain, regardless of the final distribution and playback format, CD or otherwise.

 

[Sal1950]

A good find, tried search didnt find the topic on this subject. Share your thoughts and experiences.

I'm a fan of Mark for in general having the integrity to speak out against the standards that were being set for putting the High Res logo stickers on gear and recordings. The definition as it stands for the High Defintion Recording logo allows that a needle drop recording of a 78 shellac or even a Edison cylinder done at any sampling rate above 16/44 qualifies for a High Resolution sticker. In the end Mark was uninvited from his seat on the CEA for not playing nice with others and was told via a email that his position just wasn't "good for commerce".

 

[Theo]

Obviously, true 24 bit depth is not realistically achievable on recording or playback. But, at least some of those added bits are useable in extending low level detail above the noise.

24 bit format is also used at the recording stage to keep enough headroom to accommodate unpredictable high volume transients which may overload the channel record and create hard clipping distortion. And to keep the noise level as low as possible to prevent it from being amplified by dynamic processing.

It is hard indeed to make a case for it technically on playback of a CD, whose playback bit depth, especially properly dithered, is more than adequate for home listening.

You're right, for our modest consumer hobby which is sound reproduction, 16bits is quite enough. Not to be confused with pro activities. But, some people may pretend to be "superior" by using pro like equipment at home... As people buying a Ferrari for day to day commute?