Talk:Bit resolution

It seems like most people seeking information regarding audio bit depth would benefit from also have bit resolution included. Bit resolution and bit depth go hand in hand for the audio world and you can not understand one with out the other. I agree the two articles should be merged. --- The word resolution should not be included at all regarding discussions around audio. It's a myth. When a picture is described with pixels, you can talk about resolution. But once you reach a certain level, more pixels, can only make the picture bigger not better.

Regarding digital audio, this happens from bit one, you can only talk about dynamic range vs. bit depth. The word reolution has no place. It's a digital audio marketing myth/curse.

I do not fully agree. The higher the bit rate, the less the converter must round in quantization. The less rounding, the more accurately the audio stream is captured, thus the higher the resolution of the audio file itself.

Yes, but not the resulting audio! It will simply have a potential greater dynamic range, which no electrical represntation of audio can even hope to achieve. The bit depth, above what is required to give the desired dynamic range might be benefical for processing tasks internally in digital audio systems, and thus can improve audio processing precision But not in the converter!(We are currently using only about 20 of the 24 bits in even the best of todays converters). Also the term resolution regarding audio is most often used as a subjective term do describe being able to more clearly hear small details in a sound picture. Which has nothing to do with the bit depth, as long as it is sufficient. So to be short increasing bit depth does not in any way increase audio resolution. And therefore Bit Depth is a better term in all possible uses imho.

Please refer to material written by, amongst others, Dan Lavry and Paul Frindle. And a closer read of any authorative written theory of digital audio.