which format dig. or analog

R

Rusty K

New member
Hey,

I could have sworn that I posted this message here before but I can't find it.

I just went 24bit and I would like to get straight on just how to maximize my sound quality for the eventual CD.

My soundcard support suggested that if I record analog in, that I should sample at 44100 as there would be no appreciable difference sampling at a higher rate since I'll be sampling back down for CD. Any gains would be lost.

My card is capable of 96000 in the digital format however. Am I correct in assuming that if I used my digital 4track to record and sent my tracks digitally, not optical, into my computer I could maintain the 96000 sample rate and better sound quality even though I would be eventually sampling down to 44100 again?

Would I gain any sound quality using this method of recording?

Thanks,
Rusty K
 
i'm pretty new to digital and pc recording, but i'd think that you'd want to keep bit depth and sample rate as high as your software and hardware will allow till burning to cd. plus i'd tranfer digital audio digitally, unless you want to degrade your sound. i'd only go analog to record my initial tracks if my ultimate destination were a cd. but that's just me....i mean you want the analog all on the front end of the process if you're going to cd...but again that's just me...
 
J,

Right but.....if I record "analog in" then I can't use that 96000 sample rate. To restate my question: Would I get any benefit from trying to record in digital format, therefore at 96000, and then sampling down to 44100 or would the difference in audio quality be negligible after resampling. Of course I'm at 24bit either way.

Actually I've never been completely clear on digital outs that are not optical. What is the physical difference between digital cables and analog cables that allows for transfer of digital information? Or is a converter used in either case? Is the transfer the same with a regular digital cable and an optical cable?

Thanks,

Rusty K
 
I would say that theoretically, recoding on the digital 4 track and flying them in would give you better results....it wouldnt be worth the effort to me , not to mention the syncing nightmare....I think 24bit 48khz (or even 44.1) is more than good enough....
 
Well, you may have a nomenclature problem here. Digital signals can be transmitted two ways: optical (TOSlink/lightpipe) or coaxial (S/PDIF on an RCA pin connector or AES/EBU balanced on an XLR). The signal is transmitted in the digital domain in either case. Even though the latter two cases convey the signal over copper wire, it is still a digital, sampled bitstream- not a linear analog audio signal like you get out of a mic preamp.

The only time you need an A/D converter is when you are taking a real line-level analog signal into a box. If the box can handle digital signals, whether optical or copper-based, it'll swallow them with no fursther conversion or munging.

In answer to your question: *absolutely* ship the data over digitally to your computer, whether it is optical/TOSlink, or copper/coaxial. Each time you go back into the true linear, analog domain, you have to go through another D/A, A/D pair, and there are inevitably losses associated with that. Once you're in the digital domain, you should make every effort to stay there, at the highest sample rate and bit depth you can, until you are ready to downsample/dither to 16bit/44.1kHz just before you burn the disk.
 
hey skippy,

Thanks that's all I needed to know. That's pretty much the way I had if figured but I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something before launching into my projects.

But tell me this then; What it the advantage of optical connections?

Thanks everyone,

Rusty K
 
I interpreted the question to be this : would it be better to record to the LynxOne at 24 bit 48khz thru the analog input or record to a 4 track digital recorder and fly it into the Lynx thru S/PDIF....going the 4 track first route does not save you any conversions as skippy suggested...both ways only have one A/D conversion.....i would think that the LynxOne has far superior converters to your 4 track, after all, thats pretty much what sold you on it....if you just wanted to fly tracks in you could have gotten a SBLive or Delta Audiophile.....

just my opinion...

GIDGE
 
Ok Gidge,

Well I showed my ass again. I haven't used my four track for some time since I've been using my puter. I just checked and it doesn't even have digital out so it's a moot point.

That's ok because I was obviously fuzzy on these issues anyway. Lynx One support considered the difference between 48000 and 44100 negligible. Do you have any further thoughts on that subject?


Thanks a million for your time.

Rusty K
 
The only advantage of having the optical digital connection (over S/PDIF coax or AES/EBU) is that it will connect to other equipment that has an optical digital port; e.g. some SONY CD players come with optical digital ports. That's one reason why I like the TASCAM CDRW-5000. It has all three plus -10 unbalanced and +4 balanced analog.

Note: I've never actually used the optical port since I own no other equipment that has one, but I've seen it used on someone else's machine and it works the same as coax.
One disadvantage (slight) is the slightly higher cost of the optical cable versus a 75 ohm RCA cable.
 
Rusty dont think twice about it....myself I use 44.1khz so when i bring in tracks from fruity loops, i dont have to do a conversion....i guess technically you are getting almost 4000 more samples in there so 48khz would be better, but somehow I dont think thats quite as important as the 24 bit part.....anyway, you should always keep your music at the highest possible bitrate and sampling frequency as possible, so if you are 48khz capable, sound-quality speaking, you are better off...to my ears (very untrained) it isnt enough of a difference.....
 
I'm with Gidge: in my own rig, the difference between 16 and 24 bit is much more noticeable than the difference between 44.1 and 48 kHz. With modern oversampling converters, the sample rate artifacts are minor compared to the extra precision you get with the greater bit depth. Greater bit depth gives you more ability to track without trying to wring every peak out right up to 0, which leads to a *much* more relaxed and enjoyable working style. It also provides more arithmetic resolution for software processing plug-ins, which means a lower total noise contribution (noise floor plus quantization/roundoff/floating-point-error distortion products). Win-win.

Nothing wrong with working at 44.1, and avoiding the downsampling overhead at the end. I work at 24/48, primarily out of a misplaced respect for the fact that that has always been the pro sampling rate, from the days of the Sony DASH recorders on. No better reason: I've proven to myself that I can't really hear the difference between 44.1 and 48 on my own rig. And believe me, I tried!

Optical S/PDIF versus copper/coaxial: a complete wash. It's the identical bit stream being transported by both interface styles, so there should be exactly zero difference in practice. With my rig, I make extensive use of ADAT lightpipe (the 8-channel cousin of S/PDIF). There's no copper equivalent, there: ADAT has always been optical-only. I ship S/PDIF around on copper, mostly, because it is cheap and convenient.

I'm finally tired of listening to the SCSI bus and video noises as the noise floor of my DAW monitoring setup, and I'm scrapping the Audiophile 2496 in my rig. Actually, it'll still be there, because I need its MIDI interface, and I'll be able to use it for S/PDIF I/O in emergencies, or for doing Dolby AC3 decode, as if I'm ever going to need that... But the annoyingly pitched computer-EMI noise floor is finally beginning to bug me for many uses, so I'm replacing its audio functions with a standalone 24-bit Midiman Flying Cow. My main converters for tracking purposes are still in the D1624, but sometimes it is just convenient as hell to fly in a 2-track reference mix as a starting point. The the Cow will be very nice for doing that... And you have to listen to the stuff from the DAW from time to time, and I just cannot stand that digital wheeze down there as the floor. Gimme white noise, dammit, like tape used to be!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top