HDR Audio

[AudioDoctor]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi Guys, I haven't thought through this one yet, but the idea just came to me over lunch. Perhaps it's a dumb idea, but upon first blush it seems like a good idea. 

 

 

The movie industry has HDR / high dynamic range specifications and I believe these specs are more important than the arms race to 4K and beyond. Similarly, I'm a huge fan of audio recordings with high dynamic range and believe it's more important than the arms race to 24/192 and beyond. 

 

Question: Shouldn't there be push for an HDR equivalent standard in audio and a corresponding logo to let consumers know a recording is HDR? It seems that this is potentially more valuable information than the Hi-Res audio logo developed several years ago. 

 

Caveat: Just like in movies, HDR in audio doesn't always mean good audio quality or lack of audio quality for recordings without it. 

 

Sounds like a good way to counter MQA as well.

[AudioDoctor]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

 

 

What would that look like for audio? And do we really need more dynamic range than what could be provided by a 24bit or 32bit file?

 

 

I dont think it's about MORE dynamic range as it is identifying the masterings that have the dynamic range they should have and are not compressed to hell.

[AudioDoctor]

I can count my 16/44 albums that have zero hits on HQPlayers new counter of limiter hits on one hand. Less compressed files would be very welcome, and listen up music companies, if real, would make me spend money again buying music.

 

The only problem I see with this approach is that there are types of music that by their nature have very little dynamic range.

[AudioDoctor]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

No reason we couldn't have 16 or 17.

 

I have a couple recordings with a DR of 21...

[AudioDoctor]

Actually, I think that HDR as it stands for things like computer monitors, and MQA, actually share a lot of common traits. There are a lot of cheap monitors that claim to have HDR capabilities, that do not and are only some weirdly sampled SDR to have an HDR effect. Sort of like MQA. Put one of those next to a true HDR monitor and there will be no doubt as to which is which.

 

A true HDR monitor, much like a true HDR audio file, would be great. As we already know because we have recordings with a wide dynamic range that were not mangled in mastering. If there is no master left of an old recording, then there is nothing that could be done to restore it, obviously. With the master available, or new recordings, it could really be great. Much like having a real HDR VESA certified monitor instead of a fake HDR monitor.

[AudioDoctor]

@Samuel T Cogley I think you're massively over estimating the reach of Chris's idea. This is just us talking.

 

Who wouldn't want an HDR version of Oops I Did It Again???

[AudioDoctor]

11 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

 

As long as we're on the topic, do you know how many nits of brightness your TV has?  My Sony claims to be 900 nits.

 

Who cares?

IN the context of this topic I know that a music file that has not been compressed sounds better than a music file that has been compressed.

[AudioDoctor]

13 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Only thing I know is that my computer display has 1600 nits. 

 

About that. My monitor is 600 nits and I have to browse in dark mode, especially at night or the thing is just far too bright. I can't even imagine what 1600 nits must look like.

[AudioDoctor]

4 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

If your display device isn't giving you sunburn, it's not bright enough 😊

 

I am VERY Minnesotan. If I suntan it could lead to death...