Recording 16-bit instead of 24-bit, should I?

frank_1

frank_1

New member
I am searching for a stand alone recorder like the Akai DPS12i, Korg D12, or Fostex VF16. I know computer recording is better, but that means I would have to spend a least $1,000 on a computer (don't have the cash). That is why I am searching for a stand alone unit. I would love to go with a DAW...

Anywayz, I need to know if recording at 24-bit, then dithering down to 16-bit it better then just recording at 16-bit... The Akai DPS12i only records at 16-bit, and I think I could get the Akai the cheapest off ebay.

What are your thoughts on the subject? I need to play back at least 8 tracks of audio, and record at least 8 tracks.

I am looking for a used product, so my range for a used unit would be $500-600.
 
if you got that kind of money to throw around, go pc...if you can take the time to do a little research you will soon conclude that you can acheive far more with your dollar by building your own DAW....sorry i just can't find any of the hard disk recorders a good investment , given the explosion of gear for the pc over the last two years....
 
check out the specs on those 24 bit standalone units....some may advertise 24 tracks, but the "small print " will tell ya that recording at 24 bit / 96khz will get ya 8 tracks.....beware...be warned......
 
also, not sure if you meant 8 track recording simultaneously...some units limit you to 2 or 4 tracks of simultaneous recording......

can you use you existing PC as a DAW?
 
4-track simultaneous is enough, I'm just tried of my Tascammy 414MKII! I want more then a 4-track recorder damn it!!

PC = $1,200

*New* Digi001 = $1,200

Cakewalk SonarXL = FREE, I have it!

Soundcard for Sonar = $400.

Still don't have monitors = $500 pair JBL.

My goal is to spend well below $1,000!
 
about the 16/24 bit part... the higher bit rate you record and most importantly apply the effects to the better your final sound even after dithering down to 16bit for the master. And just to be sure do not dither until the master is 100% complete and mastered. Then go to 16bit.

The more bits that the computer has to work with the more accurate the edits and effects will be and the less digital junk and artifacts will be put in your music.

Think of bitrate like you would the width on analog tape.
 
I wouldn't plop down 400 bucks on an eMachines computer. I wouldn't plop down 400 bucks on any cheap integrated system.

You can quite possibly build a machine, or have somebody build you a machine in the sub $1000 range. In parts alone, a decent enough Celeron or Duron machine can be doable for around $800, everything included (monitor, etc). Add the audiophile and you're still under $1000.

But then you gotta ask yourself "do I have the patience?" If you don't, then stick with boxes. Computers are great when they're working, and ulcer-makers when they're not.

Slackmaster 2000
 
You can build a very nice computer for $500 these days...or if you're not experienced with that sort of thing you can actually get a pretty decent Dell for the same price.
 
I disagree Slack...he doesnt have the cash at this point to do the DIY way and i gurantee the Emachines is pretty safe with 8 tracks and will definitely outperform the 4 track....

my machine right now is a HP Pavillion with an added hard drive and ram and its stable enough...of course i dont do anything on it but record....emachines is definiely on par with the hp...it is my intention to upgrade the motherboard/cpu/case/ps but all the rest is still usable.....

if he gets the cash later, he can build his own...the emachines will give him 128MB PC133 ram, a 20g hard drive,a 100mhz Celeron,cd rom drive and floppy drive,keyboard,mouse and he can build from there.....

so his options are:

stay recording on a 4 track

get a used standalone unit and kick himself in a few months

get an emachines and audiophile

build a PC for WAY more than he can afford

which brings me to a question for you Slack....i prefer to buy behind the technology to keep price down....im looking for a motherboard that i can use with a Celeron, and i may want to go as high as 1 ghz or more...i dont need to overclock...i wont be upgrading to P3,P4 in the future so that wont be a necessity....i just want to build it and leave it as is......what motherboard would you suggest for a cheapskate?......
 
lets put together a DIY celeron for cheapskates so i can quit linking to that prorec article......
 
I wouldn't advise any motherboard for a cheapskate. I have never been tempted to buy a motherboard that sold for under $100.

HOWEVER, if you really mean that you don't want to ever upgrade the CPU to a P3 or P4, then you might just check into the good ol' 440BX boards like the Abit BE6-II and the ASUS P3B-F. Both are nice boards (the Abit being kinda goofy, but still good) and both can probably be found at or under the $100 mark. Look used and you might score either for $50. Can't say how high either board goes, but I bet they both do 1Ghz.

Slackmaster 2000
 
sorry i threw in cheapskate....i mentioned in another post im not gonna buy crap anymore...i gave that up after a few $30 sound cards.....:D i should have said bargain hunter.....

thanks for the info.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top