Mastering in 24 bit and the highest sample rate?

mactreouser

New member
Hi,
What resolution will you ask from clients for Mastering? As higher as they recorded or down to 16bit/24bit 44.1 will do?
 
You have to know the Mastering formats they need. First, nobody needs to be changing bit and rate just for the hell of it
 
I would want the files exported at the resolution of the mix session. I'll do any needed resampling and truncation as part of the mastering process.
 
If you are asking about the bet depth and sample rate that the clients send you, it should be what ever bit depth and sample rate they recorded in.

As a mastering engineer, you would have superior sample rate conversion than a mix engineer would. Most of the mastering guys I deal with will play the clients files out of their super cool converters, through their analog path (EQ, compression, limiting, etc...) and capture that signal with another set of awesome converters at the sample rate and bit depth the master needs to be.

The sample rate and bit depth of your final master needs to be the appropriate sample rate and bit depth for what you are mastering for.
 
I would argue that 24-bit, in whatever sample rate the project was recorded (or if you really feel the need, mixing to a multiple of that rate) is ideal.
 
If you are asking about the bet depth and sample rate that the clients send you, it should be what ever bit depth and sample rate they recorded in.

As a mastering engineer, you would have superior sample rate conversion than a mix engineer would. Most of the mastering guys I deal with will play the clients files out of their super cool converters, through their analog path (EQ, compression, limiting, etc...) and capture that signal with another set of awesome converters at the sample rate and bit depth the master needs to be.

The sample rate and bit depth of your final master needs to be the appropriate sample rate and bit depth for what you are mastering for.
Oh yes, this really make sense! So, hybrid mastering is the best choice for better mastering result, for we could have a further better AD/DA conversion?

I would argue that 24-bit, in whatever sample rate the project was recorded (or if you really feel the need, mixing to a multiple of that rate) is ideal.
I certainly AGREE with this idea. Not lower than 24-Bit and Sample Rate at least 44.1khz. To me, this is basic requirement.
 
I prefer 24-bit files. Most mixes I receive here are 44khz, 24-bit. Sometimes people send me files at higher sample rates (96khz, 88khz, even 192khz, and I do slightly prefer these to 44khz). That being said, professional quality products can be made at 44khz no problem.
 
Last edited:
Whatever sample rate it was recorded/mixed at. 32-bit floating. A mix can have more dynamic range than the recorded files that it comes from.
 
Whatever sample rate it was recorded/mixed at. 32-bit floating. A mix can have more dynamic range than the recorded files that it comes from.

To add a little more detail - the added dynamic range from a 32-bit float file can only exist internally within the file and/or software. This can be helpful in the DAW because if you run the signal too high between plugins for example in a plugin chain, the signal will not clip because of the extra internal headroom of 32-bit processing. HOWEVER, once the signal hits a D/A converter, the extra bits are lost. Only 24-bits will be retained.

Because of this, the only advantage to sending someone a 32-bit float file, is if you happen to be clipping the master bus on your DAW when you export your final mix file. Instead of clipping, the 32-bit float file will retain the signal above 0db. If you're not clipping the master output when you render your final mix file, there is no advantage to exporting 32-bit float. 24-bit is good enough.
 
Last edited:
That's right. Also, no matter what you do, you won't be utilizing the full 144db of dynamic range that a 24 bit file has.
 
The benefit of sending a floating point file is that it doesn't matter at all where the peaks hit. +15dbFS is just as good as -60. You don't have to worry about getting as close to 0 as possible without going over. You don't have to worry if you accidentally left the Master fader way down. Just render it, send it, let the ME deal with it.
 
This was an old thread that came to life I see.

I don't think any mastering engineer should have a problem with 24-bit audio files, and if you've clipped your stuff in what you deliver, well, they should just send it back. 32-bit is kind of like the 192kHz thing, but not quite...

Internally, the value of processing floating point numbers is simple, every [Intel] processor since the 486 has included a floating point processor, or unit (FPU). This allows that [floating point] arithmetic, of which there is a bunch, to all be done on a separate processor from the one doing all the other stuff, like running drivers for devices, file i/o, moving blocks of data around, etc. (If it had to work all the time with integer data, it would be converting it back and forth to floating point too, since all of the algorithms for transforming data work with floating point numbers.)

Externally, it means nothing, unless you're in the habit of bouncing/transferring audio at 0dBFS+. (IMHO)
 
Back
Top