Unusual questions about bit depth

[digitalstasis]

Hi all !

... and double hi, as it's my first post here.

So after monitoring here for personal mixing education i finally have a question to ask or maybe it's thinking loud, as i don't really know the question i want to ask. BTW i like Yi Ching and one the first thing you learn with it is that asking the question is already main part of the answer... mm.. well so:

So the question is not about what are bit depht pro & cons etc... but rather about purely mixing.

Using a little VST tool, tobybear bitviewer (that you can find here http://www.tobybear.de/p_utilbag.html ), it's really interesting to see how the bit depht observed reacts to the incomming sound.

For example a loud sound will consume les bit depht that the same played quieter.

How does it realate to mixing ? or to computer composing ?

computer composing: if a better handling of bit depht would save some cpu cycles, but that question would be better expenrienced or discussed on computer forum.

mixing: we know by ear that bit depht is not a primary concern in music expressivity. Although for successive mixing pass, multi multi channel mixing the bit depht does import more, even if not at all as much as sampling frequency does for example.

MMM... in fact the question is maybe not about purely mixing. Mixing is maximizing effect vs sound efficiency (?).

Yes, maybe finally i have the question(s) now

- at equal quality, is it better for a signal to occupy more or less bits ?
- in more or less bits the signal will maybe not have the same qualty at all ?
- does it relate with playback volume & quality ?

Ok, thanks for efforts to those who have read so far, i'll be glad to see any remarks on my statements/questionings

 

[digitalstasis]

damn it's my third post. hope i've not been too stupid in the first two

 

[Stealthtech]

In general, for a certain audio encoding scheme, the subjective audio quality as measured from listening tests of the encoded sound when compared to the original sound on a CD will increase when the bit rate is increased. There is a law of diminishing returns however because when the subjective audio quality approaches ‘near CD quality’ then using a higher bit rate will not gain a great deal. At the lower bit rates though the subjective audio quality is far lower and improves quickly as the bit rate is increased.

 

[digitalstasis]

In general, for a certain audio encoding scheme, the subjective audio quality as measured from listening tests of the encoded sound when compared to the original sound on a CD will increase when the bit rate is increased. There is a law of diminishing returns however because when the subjective audio quality approaches ‘near CD quality’ then using a higher bit rate will not gain a great deal. At the lower bit rates though the subjective audio quality is far lower and improves quickly as the bit rate is increased.

Thanks, that quality improves is sure with higher "template" bitrate.

But that i know. What i wonder is in the same bitrate, does bits occupation matters and why and how, and, especially, when ?





.... where ?

 

[digitalstasis]

and thanks again, i have strange questions, bizarly formulated, sometimes

 

[Bulls Hit]

- at equal quality, is it better for a signal to occupy more or less bits ?
- in more or less bits the signal will maybe not have the same qualty at all ?
- does it relate with playback volume & quality ?

The bit depth relates to the size of the number used to store 1 audio sample. This number is a measure of the loudness of the audio at the instant the sample is taken. At 16 bit, there are around 64000 possible values that can be assigned to each sample. At 24 bit there are around 16 000 000 possible values available. The more values available, the more accurately the dynamic range of an analog audio sample can be represented digitally. As the music changes from say a quieter to a louder passage, the higher bit depth allows a 'smoother' transition.

By 'equal quality' I assume you mean the same bit depth. I don't think it matters how many bits are being used in each sample in terms of quality. The only time this becomes an issue is when there is no sound at all and the sample is dithered to artifically introduce low level digital noise.

In terms of quality, I think it's generally accepted that, all else being equal in terms of converter, filter and sample timing quality, 24 bit recording will result in a more accurate digital representation of audio than 16 bit recording will.

Apologies if none of this relates to your questions.........