[mcp6453[_2_]]

I've been asked to explain bit rate versus sample rate to a
non-technical audience. Can anyone think of a good *analogy* to help
explain the difference?

[John Williamson]

On 16/05/2019 12:09, mcp6453 wrote:
I've been asked to explain bit rate versus sample rate to a
non-technical audience. Can anyone think of a good *analogy* to help
explain the difference?

Bit rate is the total number of people in cars (Or buses) passing a
point on the road per unit of time. Sample rate is the number of cars
(or buses) passing the same point in the same time. Sample depth is the
number of seats in each car or bus.

Not perfect,but probably close enough.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

mcp6453 wrote:
I've been asked to explain bit rate versus sample rate to a
non-technical audience. Can anyone think of a good *analogy* to help
explain the difference?

Sample rate is an indication of bandwidth (it is twice the bandwidth).
Word length is an indication of dynamic range (each bit doubles the range).
For uncompressed data, bit rate is the sample rate times the word rate
times the number of channels.

Once you start talking about compressed audio, all bets are off.

But literally, bit rate is how much data you can fit through the hose.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford[_2_]]

On Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
Bit rate is the total number of people in cars (Or buses) passing a
point on the road per unit of time. Sample rate is the number of cars
(or buses) passing the same point in the same time. Sample depth is the
number of seats in each car or bus.

Not perfect,but probably close enough.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

NIce one, John!

And BOTH are vitally important. Also, you can not restore lost information, so rolling an audio cassette into a 16-bit, 44.1kHz (that's the spec for CD) session does not transform that cassette audio into CD quality audio. It's just cassette audio in a CD wrapper.

[Ralph Barone[_3_]]

mcp6453 wrote:
I've been asked to explain bit rate versus sample rate to a
non-technical audience. Can anyone think of a good *analogy* to help
explain the difference?


Sample rate is how often you look at the waveform to update your
measurements of it. Bit rate is how much information youre sending, and it
is a combination of sample rate (how often you measure it), sample depth
(how accurately you measure it) and compression ratio (how much information
youre willing to throw away).

[John Williamson]

On 16/05/2019 15:08, Ty Ford wrote:
On Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
Bit rate is the total number of people in cars (Or buses) passing a
point on the road per unit of time. Sample rate is the number of cars
(or buses) passing the same point in the same time. Sample depth is the
number of seats in each car or bus.

Not perfect,but probably close enough.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

NIce one, John!

And BOTH are vitally important. Also, you can not restore lost information, so rolling an audio cassette into a 16-bit, 44.1kHz (that's the spec for CD) session does not transform that cassette audio into CD quality audio. It's just cassette audio in a CD wrapper.

Lots of empty seats in the buses?

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[geoff]

On 17/05/2019 2:08 AM, Ty Ford wrote:
On Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
Bit rate is the total number of people in cars (Or buses) passing a
point on the road per unit of time. Sample rate is the number of cars
(or buses) passing the same point in the same time. Sample depth is the
number of seats in each car or bus.

Not perfect,but probably close enough.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

NIce one, John!

And BOTH are vitally important. Also, you can not restore lost information, so rolling an audio cassette into a 16-bit, 44.1kHz (that's the spec for CD) session does not transform that cassette audio into CD quality audio. It's just cassette audio in a CD wrapper.


Or the very best of vinyl into 44k1/16 for that matter.

geoff

[geoff]

On 17/05/2019 8:30 AM, John Williamson wrote:
On 16/05/2019 15:08, Ty Ford wrote:
On Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
Bit rate is the total number ofÂ* people in cars (Or buses) passing a
point on the road per unit of time. Sample rate is the number of cars
(or buses) passing the same point in the same time. Sample depth is the
number of seats in each car or bus.

Not perfect,but probably close enough.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

NIce one, John!

And BOTH are vitally important. Also, you can not restore lost
information, so rolling an audio cassette into a 16-bit, 44.1kHz
(that's the spec for CD) session does not transform that cassette
audio into CD quality audio. It's just cassette audio in a CD wrapper.

Lots of empty seats in the buses?


Hopefully, otherwise how would you represent the zeros in a binary word.

geoff

[geoff]

On 16/05/2019 11:09 PM, mcp6453 wrote:
I've been asked to explain bit rate versus sample rate to a
non-technical audience. Can anyone think of a good *analogy* to help
explain the difference?

Sample-rate is a solid figure based on double the highest frequency to
be sampled.

Bit-rate in linear systems (LPCM) is the sample rate multiplied by the
bit depth.

In non-linear systems the bit rate is the rate of digital data being
delivered, however this has no relationship to that of LPCM other that
lower bit rates equate to lower fidelity.... the exception being where
lossless data compression has been applied, which although being a
bit-rate lower than the equivalent spec LPCM, should have bit-identical
output.

geoff

[[email protected]]

John Williamson: "sample depth"..??

First time I ever head of that. Are you sure you
didn't mean BIT depth? Even my cats know what
that is lol!

[geoff]

On 17/05/2019 3:18 PM, wrote:
John Williamson: "sample depth"..??

First time I ever head of that. Are you sure you
didn't mean BIT depth? Even my cats know what
that is lol!


Bit depth of the sample. Pretty straightforward. What a limited
understanding-depth your cats have.

geoff

[[email protected]]

geoff wrote: "Bit depth of the sample. Pretty straightforward. What a limited
understanding-depth your cats have.

geoff "


I've read up on the fundamentals of digital audio on many websites,
viewed endless YouTubes on the subject, and not once was mentioned
the term "sample depth". I guess they all don't know what they're
talking about.

Learn something new every day I guess!

[Tobiah]

Lots of empty seats in the buses?


Hopefully, otherwise how would you represent the zeros inÂ* a binary word.

geoff

Here we go with numberism again. Zeros are bus riders like any
other numeric values. I suppose you want them to sit in the back.

[None]

Theckmaah theckmahh @ tardsRus . org wrote in message
...

I've read up on the fundamentals of digital audio on many websites,

And obviously, didn't understand a word of it.

I guess they all don't know what they're talking about.

No, you're the one who doesnt know what you're talking about, and you just
love to prove that, don't you, li'l buddy?

Learn something new every day I guess!

Not you, theckmah. You refuse to learn. As you keep proving.

HTH. FCKWFDF!

[[email protected]]

Ohh come on - don't let the bully crap on and shut down
another good thread!!

[geoff]

On 18/05/2019 3:36 AM, Tobiah wrote:
Lots of empty seats in the buses?


Hopefully, otherwise how would you represent the zeros inÂ* a binary word.

geoff

Here we go with numberism again.Â* Zeros are bus riders like any
other numeric values.Â* I suppose you want them to sit in the back.


No.

Full seats are 1s, empty seats are 0s. All happily sitting in the bus
together.

geoff

[John Williamson]

On 18/05/2019 01:55, geoff wrote:
On 18/05/2019 3:36 AM, Tobiah wrote:
Lots of empty seats in the buses?


Hopefully, otherwise how would you represent the zeros in a binary
word.

geoff

Here we go with numberism again. Zeros are bus riders like any
other numeric values. I suppose you want them to sit in the back.


No.

Full seats are 1s, empty seats are 0s. All happily sitting in the bus
together.

Nice one.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

"Bit depth" is a meaningless term that was invented because somebody
didn't think that consumers could understand "sample rate" and "word
length."

Creeping meatballism rules!

[[email protected]]

Mike Rivers: ""Bit depth" is a meaningless term..."

WHY are terms that nearly everyone else in this industry uses
considered "meaningless" among you guys?? And bit
depth is not the only such word or phrase to be trampled
upon by the regulars in here when explanation of concepts
is involved.

I find it kind of arrogant and long-nosed, to be honest.

[None]

Theckmah, the village idiot theckhhmaaaah @ braindead . shortbus . edu
drooled in message
...

Mike Rivers: ""Bit depth" is a meaningless term..."

WHY are terms that nearly everyone else in this industry uses
considered "meaningless" among you guys?? And bit
depth is not the only such word or phrase to be trampled
upon by the regulars in here when explanation of concepts
is involved.

Theckmah, the village idiot, is back with his schtick: pretending that he
knows something about audio, and blaming his abject ignorance on others who
actually understand audio. It's a kind of obsessive behavior from the
retarded dumb****.

Li'l Crissie, shouldn't you be off on some other forum, pretending that
you're an expert on tire pressure? Instead of constantly coming here to
prove that you're a moronic ****-for-brains?

I find it kind of arrogant and long-nosed, to be honest.

Of course, you yourself are ignorant and short-dicked. As well as a retarded
dumb****.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
"Bit depth" is a meaningless term that was invented because somebody
didn't think that consumers could understand "sample rate" and "word
length."

I wouldn't go that far. It is a synonym for word length and makes reasonable
enough sense.

Creeping meatballism rules!

Well, yes.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:

WHY are terms that nearly everyone else in this industry uses
considered "meaningless" among you guys?? And bit
depth is not the only such word or phrase to be trampled
upon by the regulars in here when explanation of concepts
is involved.

I think you are confusing the people in the industry with the marketing
folks. What people actually talk about in the industry and write about in
papers bears very little connection to the stuff that falls out of the mouths
of marketing people and appears in advertisements.

I find it kind of arrogant and long-nosed, to be honest.

Mike doesn't like the phrase because, really, it -is- just a made-up marketing
word for something that already has a perfectly good technical word that
has been used for many decades.

I am okay with the phrase because I view the marketing people as just
something we all have to live with. I only get offended when they make
up words that have no actually valid concepts behind them, which happens
often enough. Or words like "balanced power" which are deliberately intended
to sound like something they aren't.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

Scott Dorsey wrote: "Mike doesn't like the phrase because, really, it -is- just a
made-up marketing word"

To Rivers everything is a "marketing word". He doesn't even think it's
necessary to adhere to the impedance(ohms) range printed near the
speaker terminals on the backs of receivers and amps! He thinks
they're just "marketing " also.

Not to impugn Rivers' knowledge on a range of subjects, but I guess this
sticker is also "marketing nonsense", Mike?....

https://www.atlantictireonline.com/w...looks-like.jpg

It may be marketing nonsense to some, but it imparts knowledge
readily to those who would otherwise not grasp what it is
imparting.

[[email protected]]

Scott Dorsey wrote: "
I wouldn't go that far. It is a synonym for word length and makes reasonable
enough sense."

Thank you!!

[None]

Theckmah hawked up this goober in message
...

Scott Dorsey wrote: "Mike doesn't like the phrase because, really, it -is-
just a
made-up marketing word"

To Rivers everything is a "marketing word".

I think he knows what's marketing and what's technical. You, of course, have
no idea, and no intention of learning. It might interfere with your moronic
kook-dancing.

Not to impugn Rivers' knowledge on a range of subjects,

You are impugning his knowledge, and calling attention to the fact with your
imbecilic denial.

sticker is also "marketing nonsense", Mike?....

link to li'l theckhhmaaah's obsession

Yup, there it is, bringing your "tire pressure" hobbyhorse into an unrelated
discussion. It has nothing to do with bit rates or sample rates or related
terminology, but you have to beat that dead horse at every opportunity.

It may be marketing nonsense to some,

Nobody is calling that marketing nonsense, especially not in this froup. But
being a retarded dumb ****, you just like to spew.

[geoff]

On 19/05/2019 2:27 AM, wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: "Mike doesn't like the phrase because, really, it -is- just a
made-up marketing word"

To Rivers everything is a "marketing word". He doesn't even think it's
necessary to adhere to the impedance(ohms) range printed near the
speaker terminals on the backs of receivers and amps! He thinks
they're just "marketing " also.

Not to impugn Rivers' knowledge on a range of subjects, but I guess this
sticker is also "marketing nonsense", Mike?....

https://www.atlantictireonline.com/w...looks-like.jpg

It may be marketing nonsense to some, but it imparts knowledge
readily to those who would otherwise not grasp what it is
imparting.


That label is not marketing nonsense. That is concise specifications
that will void your warranty (and probably safety) if ignored.

The marketing nonsense is the ad or the salesman who says that this tyre
will make you stop quicker and corner faster because of the special
rubber composite formulated by their lab scientists after years of
in-depth study.

And anyway, everybody knows that all tyres should be inflated to within
0.5% of the maximum spec at all time, eh. Just like audio.

geoff

[[email protected]]

geoff wrote:
"And anyway, everybody knows that all tyres should be inflated to within
0.5% of the maximum spec at all time, eh. Just like audio.

geoff"

I hope by that statement you're being facetious.

[geoff]

On 19/05/2019 1:39 PM, wrote:
geoff wrote:
"And anyway, everybody knows that all tyres should be inflated to within
0.5% of the maximum spec at all time, eh. Just like audio.

geoff"

I hope by that statement you're being facetious.


Of course. But better than being faecetious.

geoff

[James Price[_5_]]

On Saturday, May 18, 2019 at 6:59:23 AM UTC-5, Mike Rivers wrote:
"Bit depth" is a meaningless term that was invented because somebody
didn't think that consumers could understand "sample rate" and "word
length."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you provide a technical review for
Ethan Winer's book, 'The Audio Expert'? Do you recall a section in
that book titled 'Sample Rate and Bit Depth'? According to Winer, "The
intended audience is intermediate - to advanced-level recording
engineers".

[Tobiah]

On 5/17/2019 5:55 PM, geoff wrote:
On 18/05/2019 3:36 AM, Tobiah wrote:
Lots of empty seats in the buses?


Hopefully, otherwise how would you represent the zeros inÂ* a binary
word.

geoff

Here we go with numberism again.Â* Zeros are bus riders like any
other numeric values.Â* I suppose you want them to sit in the back.


No.

Full seats are 1s, empty seats are 0s. All happily sitting in the bus
together.

Sadly the zeros are used to this. It's like people are looking right
through them.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 5/19/2019 3:23 AM, James Price wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you provide a technical review for
Ethan Winer's book, 'The Audio Expert'? Do you recall a section in
that book titled 'Sample Rate and Bit Depth'? According to Winer, "The
intended audience is intermediate - to advanced-level recording
engineers".

I did the technical review of Ethan's book. I don't recall that section
or what it said. While I did make some suggestions about changes here
and there, it was Ethan who made the final decisions. If he wanted to
use the term "bit depth" I wasn't going to talk him out of it.

There's a second edition that I haven't seen.

[James Price[_5_]]

On Monday, May 20, 2019 at 6:00:22 AM UTC-5, Mike Rivers wrote:
I did the technical review of Ethan's book. I don't recall that section
or what it said. While I did make some suggestions about changes here
and there, it was Ethan who made the final decisions. If he wanted to
use the term "bit depth" I wasn't going to talk him out of it.

Given that the books' intended audience is intermediate to advanced-level
recording engineers, do you really think Ethan used "bit depth" because
he felt his readers were incapable of understanding "word length"?

There's a second edition that I haven't seen.

I haven't seen the second edition, however it's listed in the first
edition(chapter 8).

[Tobiah]

Creeping meatballism rules!

Today I learned that Mad magazine goes back
to at least 1957.

[polymod]

"Tobiah" wrote in message ...

Creeping meatballism rules!

Today I learned that Mad magazine goes back
to at least 1957.


When I was young my Mom would always buy me a Mad magazine when I was sick.
Spy vs. Spy and Don Martin were my favorites.

Poly


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[geoff]

On 21/05/2019 3:37 AM, Tobiah wrote:
Creeping meatballism rules!

Today I learned that Mad magazine goes back
to at least 1957.


I also go back to 1957 (September). Maybe that explains something.

geoff

[[email protected]]

James Price wrote: "
Given that the books' intended audience is intermediate to advanced-level
recording engineers, do you really think Ethan used "bit depth" because
he felt his readers were incapable of understanding "word length"? "

By Ethan do you mean Winer?

If so I'd love to have him come on here and clear the air
about some basic terms. If there are three people whom
I would rarely refute the words of, they are Ethan Winer,
Bob Katz, and Barry Diament.

[None]

thekhmah theckkkmaaaah @ hortbus . edu wrote in message
...

By Ethan do you mean Winer?

If so I'd love to have him come on here and clear the air
about some basic terms.

There is no "air" to be "cleared." You have a problem with the terminology
because you're a thick-headed and obstinate retard. That's nobody's fault
but your own. FCKWAFRDA.

If there are three people whom
I would rarely refute the words of, they are Ethan Winer,
Bob Katz, and Barry Diament.

Nobody gives a **** who you would or would not pretend to "refute." You'd
pretend that you know better, and you'd soil yourself pretending to lecture
someone with your retarded dumb****ery, blubbering about how you're right
and everyone else is wrong, all the while proving that you're a complete
idiot. You've played out this third-rate village-idiot sitcom countless
times.

[Klay Anderson[_3_]]

Mad Magazine debuted in the fall of 1952. A few months after I was born. And yes, I have the album.

[david gourley[_4_]]

"polymod" :



"Tobiah" wrote in message ...

Creeping meatballism rules!

Today I learned that Mad magazine goes back
to at least 1957.


When I was young my Mom would always buy me a Mad magazine when I was
sick. Spy vs. Spy and Don Martin were my favorites.

Poly


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


I still have the "It's A Gas" cut-out record they included in an early 60s
issue. Damn if it will play well anymore, but it was a cardboard disc!

david