• 0 Posts
  • 47 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: March 6th, 2025

help-circle
  • I am in construction (not manufacturing) and own my own business. Truth is, they are both right.

    Rodney is right because there are a huge number of variables that the prof’s equation is ignoring. Also, it is generally a good idea to know what you are manufacturing and work to produce that product as efficiently as possible. The professor is sort of putting the cart before the horse by building a factory with no product.

    That said, we are in a learning environment and seemingly in a lower-level class. You have to strip away real-world variables to teach the lessons at hand. The professor is right not to include corrupt politicians and mafia folk, it’s too much when you are trying to start with the basics. But he should’ve had the class decide on a product - he said it himself, it could be anything - and then build up from there.

    Mafia payoffs are a 300 level course.












  • Thank you, that was an interesting breakdown. I really appreciate his methodology. I’m going to deep dive into anything he has posted. Though he doesn’t come to the same conclusion I do, the takeaway is:

    1. Yes, there is noticeable sound loss when converting a 24 bit sample to 16 bit.

    2. You can really screw with a 24 bit sample and still have a listenable file, presumably because of the bit depth.

    3. Recording and mastering in 24 bit benefits classical music reproduction, and I would argue, any acoustic music reproduction. So, anything with a vocal, drum kit, acoustic guitar, etc.

    Since the video is about dither specifically, he does conclude that mastering to 16 bit gives the technician a sturdier product when played back on the myriad of modern equipment we have. It’s arguable, sure, but since this an audiophile sub…

    Really though, thanks for posting the video. Deep dive in 3, 2…