Jump to content

Yesterday a mains cable sceptic had to revise his thoughts.


Fourlegs

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Fourlegs said:

I was deliberately ignoring you so there is little point in repeating your post.  Between you and Shadders you have set about sucking the fun out of this thread. But I should not be surprised I 

That's says if all. You complain about anyone who does not agree with you, make petty comments and diversions while failing to justify your stance when asked.

Regards Andrew 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick it’s a shame that people like Shadders want to argue points without explaining themselves. In Shadders case he still has not stated what bits get changed. I really enjoy reading about your hifi adventures and hope that you continue to report back on them. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, andrew s said:

That's says if all. You complain about anyone who does not agree with you, make petty comments and diversions while failing to justify your stance when asked.

Regards Andrew 

It’s because you knew what the thread was about. Two blokes listened to some mains cables at the end of a listening session and we got a surprise  result. 

There was no methodology and none was intended

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Fourlegs said:

It’s because you knew what the thread was about. Two blokes listened to some mains cables at the end of a listening session and we got a surprise  result. 

There was no methodology and none was intended

So it was "totally invalid" to paraphrase you.

Thank you for the clarification. 

Regards Andrew 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheFlash said:

I’ve just decided to unfollow this thread.

Please don’t react to this or quote me 😊

42 minutes ago, Bokke said:

Ok no problem

I'll set them up, you kick them in!

:oj:

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DomT said:

The audio quality does not change if you record one, two or fifty tracks. The audio quality does not change if you use effects or not. A stereo file is produced at the end of the process for consumers. 

What numbers are you referring to? There are none that matter. The only thing that matters is the end resulting stereo file and it’s bit depth Shadders is confused and is confusing others. Nothing to see here.

I'm back!

Could you do me a favour as, right now, I'm with Andrew S on this. Could you quote the Shadders post where he talks about bit depth changing. I thought I recalled him saying that the bits changed. If the music is altered by the producer, the bits have to change or the sound wouldn't change. I think this is what Andrew is pointing out. He's not talking about bit depth or audio quality. He's saying the digital file will be different.

Show me the offending post I missed.

Thanks

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TheFlash said:

I'm back!

Could you do me a favour as, right now, I'm with Andrew S on this. Could you quote the Shadders post where he talks about bit depth changing. I thought I recalled him saying that the bits changed. If the music is altered by the producer, the bits have to change or the sound wouldn't change. I think this is what Andrew is pointing out. He's not talking about bit depth or audio quality. He's saying the digital file will be different.

Show me the offending post I missed.

Thanks

I never said that he said that. I mentioned bit depth to Andrew S. Shadders then quoted me out of context and I called him out and posted the full screenshot of my full quote and not the part that he cut out; just look at the screen shot and compare with what Shadders wrote if this has upset you  

And Shadders still has not stated what ‘bits’ he thinks gets changed when I change a reverb send to a vocal track. I guess by now that we will never get an answer and he will continue to claim that ‘bits’ get changed because he is behaving like a troll.

When studios use DAW multi-tracking we don’t need to consider how many tracks we use for fear of a drop in audio quality because there is none. It’s baffling to me why hifi people think that there maybe a drop in quality when it’s already established for decades by DAW users that there isn’t.

But maybe people in this thread think that a simple recording of piano and voice sounds better than a 48 track piece because each additional track used affects the ‘bits’ in someways and this affects the final stereo master. This is a bit like me suggesting to a doctor that if a person has a headache that he should drill a hole in their skull. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DomT said:

The digital file size may or may not change if I reduce the amount of reverb on a track. What does not change is the bit depth of the track. Frankly it was complete nonsense for Shadders to introduce this into the conversation as it has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about. Please choose an appropriate smiley to add to this post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DomT

Like The Flash, dave and Andrew S  i must say i am struggling with your point about reverb. 

My logic goes like this

you add some reverb to a song, enough to be audible ( as Tuga said )

It's a digital recording so this is capured in 1s and 0s.

There is an audible difference so the 1s and 0s must be different ( assuming a perfect reproduction chain )

What am missing ?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, DomT said:

When studios use DAW multi-tracking we don’t need to consider how many tracks we use for fear of a drop in audio quality because there is none. It’s baffling to me why hifi people think that there maybe a drop in quality when it’s already established for decades by DAW users that there isn’t.

I fully agree with this.

39 minutes ago, DomT said:

But maybe people in this thread think that a simple recording of piano and voice sounds better than a 48 track piece because each additional track used affects the ‘bits’ in someways and this affects the final stereo master. 

I don't think a simple recording will sound better than a 48 track. If the simple recording is on 2 tracks the other 46 will add to the final stereo master but should not effect the quality of the other 2 unless specifically intended to do so.

I am sorry if I led the discussion in the wrong direction that was not my intent.

Regards Andrew 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, mtbmarkymark said:

@DomT

Like The Flash, dave and Andrew S  i must say i am struggling with your point about reverb. 

My logic goes like this

you add some reverb to a song, enough to be audible ( as Tuga said )

It's a digital recording so this is capured in 1s and 0s.

There is an audible difference so the 1s and 0s must be different ( assuming a perfect reproduction chain )

What am missing ?

You are missing a complete understanding of how a DAW works. Here is an example of how it works. What is 1+1? Is it 2 or it is 1.95? What is 1+1 +1? Is it 3 or 2.90? Some people on here, not understanding how a DAW works, are suggesting that 1+1+1 does not equal 3. The answer is 3 and it is only 3.  

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shadders said:
5 hours ago, DomT said:

The digital file size may or may not change if I reduce the amount of reverb on a track. What does not change is the bit depth of the track. Frankly it was complete nonsense for Shadders to introduce this into the conversation as it has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about. Please choose an appropriate smiley to add to this post. 

Well I think that I can be forgiven for a small typo of not saying …”this nonsense about bits….” rather than just writing “this nonsense” given that you refuse to tell us what these supposed ‘bits’ are. There are no other ‘bits’ that can effect the outcome of the recording example that I gave. 
 

And as you refuse to state what these ‘bits’ are our only conclusion can be that you don’t know what you are talking about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DomT said:

Well I think that I can be forgiven for a small typo of not saying …”this nonsense about bits….” rather than just writing “this nonsense” given that you refuse to tell us what these supposed ‘bits’ are. There are no other ‘bits’ that can effect the outcome of the recording example that I gave. 
 

And as you refuse to state what these ‘bits’ are our only conclusion can be that you don’t know what you are talking about. 

Hi,

As others have tried to explain, any changes to the sound you implement such as reverb (your example) will change the bits.

Digital audio consists of sample rate, bit depth (number of bits per sample), and the actual sample values themselves. The sample values will consist of 24bits (assumed) and when you implement changes in reverb, the 24bit values change, and hence the bits change. This is what is meant by changing the bits.

Regards,

Shadders.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...