dad4749d   
   XPost: rec.music.gdead, sci.electronics.design   
   From: trevor@home.net   
      
   "marcman"  wrote in message   
   news:1c61ca50-d3f1-4273-b47f-0fc38e0649e7@u14g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...   
   > > Real audiophiles insist on 32-bit DACs.   
   >   
   > You mean real Audiophools :-)   
   > However at least better DAC's still work well with 16 bit files, even if   
   > NONE can deliver better than true 24 bit resolution in our universe, and I   
   > know of no normal home that can really use more than true 16 bit (96dB)   
   > DNR,   
   > or anybody that normally listens to music in a sound proof isolation booth   
   > on a regular basis.   
      
   }I've spent half my life in a sound proof isolation booth.   
   }Don't knock it 'till you've tried it . . .   
      
   I'm not knocking it, just staing that despite yourself, it is extremely rare   
   for normal listening.   
      
      
   > And lets not even consider how many actual recordings   
   > even *remotely* approach 16 bit DNR to begin with!   
      
   }Huh? What?   
      
   Ignoring fades, most modern pop recordings have about 20-30dB real DNR, and   
   NO recording ever made on tape comes remotely close to needing 16 bits, even   
   those that used Dolby SR,  (and direct to disc recodings were even worse)   
   Only modern classical digital recordings approach true 16 bit DNR, but who   
   really wants to listen in a sound proof booth so they can hear the pages   
   turning anyway? Not too many I'm willing to bet!   
      
   Trevor.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)