I would like to save disk space and
Just curious about what has better quality:
Sizes of both are pretty much the same:
- DTS Core @ 24 bit - loosy
- FLAC @ 16 bit - lossless, converted from 24 bit DTS-HD MA
FLAC @ 16 bit ~ DTS Core @ 24 bit
From what I understand, 24 bit in DTS Core may make sound more spacious in comparison to 16 bit lossless FLAC. But can be wrong.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2
Last edited by vash1; 2nd Dec 2020 at 03:10.
24 bit audio isuseful in recording, where so many plugin effects are used that the quantization errors can add up to be audible. But it's been demopnstarated in double blind tests that audiophiles couldn't hear a difference (there's a study in the AES journal and it's been repeated). IMO 24 bit audio is a waste of space.
The thing is, the LSB in 16 bit audio is better that -90 dB, and most any decent DAC can get better than -80 dB spuriae free. If you think your speakers or headphones are that clean think again. Look at some speaker waterfall plots, and remember that 0.2% distortion for a speaker is very, very good, and that's not even -60 dB.
The funniest thing to me is how many old recordings done on analog tape are being released in 24 bit. The best dynamic range you can get from analog tape is 80dB, and 60-65 is more typical.
ANd that thing about 24 bit making it sound more spacious is very misleading. EVen if 24 bit really had the benefits all those so called golden ears claim, that would only be true if you had an exceptional recording, and those are very rare.
So my answer is that they sound exactly the same unless you messed up the conversion or you're one of those self deluded "golden ears".