16 bit is good enough.....


As I type this, I’m listening to a new CD by Tony Minasian titled "Drums & Bells" (Comparing Sticks) and it’s "just" a 16 bit recording, and it blows away the notion that I need hi-rez in my life. There’s a realistic drum set in my living room, right now, with clashes and decays that (to borrow a phrase from John Darko) hang like Gandolph’s fireworks in the air.

Notes come from their solid, respective locations and never waver. Invisible hands move left, right, up and down as notes are played. I’ve timed decays that last from 4- 10 seconds with notes overplaying that decay, only to keep hearing the first ones. Kick drums come right at you and no imagination is needed to tell how wide it is and that it’s facing you. Angles of drums are plain as day, as are cymbals, bells and what have you.

I got this from Elliot Midwood over at Acoustic Image after Tony called me to let me know he has it out. Elliot thinks it’s the finest recording he’s heard. I’ll admit it’s a bit esoteric in nature and quite eclectic when it comes to taste but if you like your system, let this be one of the CDs to show off to your friends.

There are bass notes coming from percussion that originate a good 4 feet off the ground before coming down to the driver’s speaker level placement. Notes emanate naturally, going their intended way. No processing trickery needed. Tracks are simply titled after the tool used: straw brush, muted drums, wood stick, rattle stick, wood metal, plastic brushes, rubber mallets, straw and metal brushes, objects dropped, bells, toys, etc. And each and everyone has it’s own unique and undeniable sound. It’s ear candy in the extreme. Before I read the titles, I could tell if it were wood, metal or something else used to strike different surfaces. With a good, resolving system, it’s painfully easy to discern.

The only credits are to drummer Brad Dutz who goes solo for the first 13 tracks and he’s joined by drummer Chris Wabich for the final 6 tracks. There’s also a mention to Ken and Vinnie Rossi as well. Cover art is by Japanese artist Kaoru Mansour. It was recorded live and mixed by Tony Minasian. Speaking to Tony, he’s always been of the opinion that the source and speakers are the most important links in the audio chain. If done properly, you don’t need all the extra processing. This CD goes a long way to validating that argument.

For quite a while now there’s been a big resurgence in 16 bit NOS and I’d love to hear this CD on something with a TotalDac, MSB or equivalent DAC to do this justice. If only the studios would stop trying different ways to pick our pockets and do a decent job mastering CDs in the first place, our lives could be so much easier.

All the best,
Nonoise
128x128nonoise
I have a claimed "up sampling" DAC so there's whatever that does (good cables for it, groovy power supply…frequent dusting), but man…"Redbook" mondo no problemo that can sound astonishingly clear and detailed, and lots of ECM stuff as I'm in my beatnik phase of jazz piano obsession for the last decade or so. Vijay Iyer, Craig Taborn, etc., is so good you might flip your lid.
Sorry, but the statement about 16/44 blows away the notion that you need hi-Res is wrong used the way nonoise presented this. How in the hell can somebody say 16/44 is the best without listening to the same song(s) in 24/96,24/192, or in DSD? I have never heard a song sound worse using hi-res or DSD, sometimes they sound the same worse case.
as for dacs I would agree, but using the new ps audio directstream, every time the software gets an update, it's like buying a new dac that's better than the last, and the dac is fantastic to start with.
I think I agree...with advanced DACs, up-sampling, filters and reclocking, RBCD is rarely the weak link. When I inserted my Cambridge 851N streamer/DAC, the difference between red book and SACD became so minimal that I took out my preamp and went only redbook--digital out fromMarantz SA8004.  Hi Rez downloads do sound better, but not by much. I buy downloads now more as test items/out of curiosity, especially if I have a high quality CD to compare it with. If I had a much better system or younger ears, might be different, but I'm happy now. I run the equipment mentioned above through Bel Canto ref 500Ms and Dali Mentor 6s, Nordost and Acoustic Zen cables. 
It sounds like many of us are saying the same thing just differently. Mastering quality is a order of magnitude difference. The difference between 16/44 and say 24/192 is correspondingly relatively minor.
I think the key here has been touched on, but not singled out: time-domain transient distortion, more important the higher in frequency the transient is.  Early ways of dealing with it on straight CD's were filters that sacrificed high-frequencies to eliminate pre-ringing, but nevertheless sounded better (eg. more less "CD sound").  The introduction of high-res and upsampling solved this problem in a different way.  The spread of upsampling throughout the production chain has now made remastered CD's and modern CD's sound much better than the earlier ones.

The pre-ringing does not exist in nature.  The sensitivity of our hearing in sorting out "non-natural" sounds in context has been known for years, and this has made me wonder for thirty-five years why "objectivists" and "scientists' were so fervent in denying the claims of analog folk that analog sounded better.  I remember sending John Atkinson a letter back in the '90's suggesting that this pre-ringing is what created "CD strain" for many folks.  I received no response nor was my letter published .... but years later when the first high-end preamp introduced the time-domain-correcting filter(s) John suddenly "got it".  My crack-pot letter became the new reality.