At www.ruccas.org, I have posted results of double-blind listening tests comparing Csound compiled for 32 bit samples and compiled for 64 bit samples. In one case there was a clearly audible different. 

In both cases, soundfiles were 96 KHz float stereo.

This is not directly relevant to your case, but I think it indicates that in some types of sounds, there will be differences that careful listeners can hear.

Regards,
Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Jacob Hofmann 
Sent: Sep 1, 2005 12:45 PM
To: Csound List 
Subject: [Csnd] Conversion into 48 khz and 24 bit, does it make sense?

Dear list,

I am planing to do a major remix of my pieces. They consist of 
soundfiles originally recorded at a sample-rate of 44,1 khz at 16 bit. 
I wonder if there would be an increase of sound-quality if I converted 
these files into 48 khz and 24 bit beforehand. I know the files 
themselves would surely not sound better themselves, but as 
reverberation and early reflections are added in the course of he mix, 
aswell as the amplitude of these files is altered, I guess doing it in 
48 khz and 24 bit might be an advantage: the higher sample-rate would 
give a better temporal resolution (important for the early reflections) 
and the higher bit-rate more definition and a higher headroom for the 
amplitude level. What do other Csounders think? Do my thoughts on this 
make sense?

Best regards,

Jan Jacob


sound         |         movement          |          object         |   
        space
sonic architecture       |        site: http://www.sonicarchitecture.de
spatial electronic composition     |    2nd order ambisonic music

-- 
Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk



-- 
Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk

You know, since you've mentioned it both here and on the music-dsp 
lists, I've started to listen more carefully to sounds rendered with 
single and double precision and I really think you're on to something 
with that idea.

Double precision definitely sounds better... at present are there any 
studies and/or papers that deal with the subject more in depth ?? I'm 
quite interested to learn more about these phenomena.


-David

On Sep 1, 2005, at 6:01 PM, Michael Gogins wrote:

> At www.ruccas.org, I have posted results of double-blind listening 
> tests comparing Csound compiled for 32 bit samples and compiled for 64 
> bit samples. In one case there was a clearly audible different.
>
> In both cases, soundfiles were 96 KHz float stereo.
>
> This is not directly relevant to your case, but I think it indicates 
> that in some types of sounds, there will be differences that careful 
> listeners can hear.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Jacob Hofmann 
> Sent: Sep 1, 2005 12:45 PM
> To: Csound List 
> Subject: [Csnd] Conversion into 48 khz and 24 bit, does it make sense?
>
> Dear list,
>
> I am planing to do a major remix of my pieces. They consist of
> soundfiles originally recorded at a sample-rate of 44,1 khz at 16 bit.
> I wonder if there would be an increase of sound-quality if I converted
> these files into 48 khz and 24 bit beforehand. I know the files
> themselves would surely not sound better themselves, but as
> reverberation and early reflections are added in the course of he mix,
> aswell as the amplitude of these files is altered, I guess doing it in
> 48 khz and 24 bit might be an advantage: the higher sample-rate would
> give a better temporal resolution (important for the early reflections)
> and the higher bit-rate more definition and a higher headroom for the
> amplitude level. What do other Csounders think? Do my thoughts on this
> make sense?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jan Jacob

-- 
Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk