16 bit / 24 bit
- Thread starter mrmoe
- Start date
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
The difference is about 50dB or so of extra dynamic range you have to work with in 24 bit. The advantage there is you have a lot more headroom before clipping and a lower digital floor, giving your signal more room to breathe and you mix a lot more room to maneuver than you have with 16 bit.
There's another factor, and that is that older 16-bit workstations tend to - it's not guaranteed, but just a statistical tendency - have older/poorer quality design in their analog-to-digital converters. This can directly impact the actual sound quality of the digital recording itself; the older converter designs tend to have more of that "digital sound" to them, a bit colder or more brittle than some of the newer 24-bit converters.
Is 16 bit adequate? Define adequate.
. Sure you can do serviceable work in 16 bit, it just depends on how serviceable you want/need it to be and what you intend on using the recordings for. What is your intent?G.
Tim Gillett
Banned
It also depends on how "dynamic" is the music recorded. Music which varies between very quiet and very loud, like much classical music, needs a recorder more capable in that area.
But much pop/rock music is usually "loud' from start to finish and 16 bit can be more than adequate. In many such applications the noise floor of the home studio and gear is way noisier than 16 bit anyway.
Hard to say without as Glen says, knowing the intended destination and, as I say, the style of music.
You can "go safe" and record in 24 bit so long as you accept the penalty of larger file sizes and processing times.
Cheers Tim
But much pop/rock music is usually "loud' from start to finish and 16 bit can be more than adequate. In many such applications the noise floor of the home studio and gear is way noisier than 16 bit anyway.
Hard to say without as Glen says, knowing the intended destination and, as I say, the style of music.
You can "go safe" and record in 24 bit so long as you accept the penalty of larger file sizes and processing times.
Cheers Tim
The Black Circl
New member
First, forget that we are talking about technology and it will be easier to process.
Industry standard calls for recoding in 24 bit and then mastering in 16 bit. This really makes no god damn sense if you think about it...
...bit rate is the amount of kilobytes per a single sample. So a 24 bit rate has 24 bits of information per a sample and 16 has 16.
A sample is easiest to understand like this...
Pretent that you are using a camera instead of a recorder.
Cameras are used to take pictures, and if you took one picture an hour you could say that the sample rate is one picture per hour. This is because a sample is a sample of the whole.
So if a recorder takes 48k pictures of an analog sound wave (a guitar for example) then the sample rate is 48k.
And if the bit rate is 24 bits per sample then you are recording at 48k and 24 kbps. Technically you record with these values.
Mastering occurs at 44k 16bit
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
I don't want to split hairs, but mastering to CD-A is processed at high resolution (usually analog - the highest possible resolution) and is then rendered TO a 16-bit replication master. It makes perfect sense when I think about it.
Not "mastering AT (or IN) 16-bit. There's a big (huge, gigantic, drastic) difference.
And again, WORD LENGTH (or BIT DEPTH). Not "bit rate" -- That has nothing to do with anything here. And it's not 24kbps (24,000 bits per second). It's 24-bit word length at 48Ks/S in this case. Big difference - Huge, gigantic, etc.
I can't think of one mastering scenario (and I can think of plenty of scenarios) where processing would occur in 16-bit. Rarely 24, more often at least 32 with a floating point, and again, generally speaking, analog.
I'm not sure where you're getting your information (and your general lexicon), but you should look for another source.
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
Sorry - Doubled up there.
The Black Circl
New member
rayc
retroreprobate
Now, with the help of the degree, go back, copy, paste your post into a new post & edit the errors you made. When typos create that much confusion or error you ought to take ownership of the error and clrify your statement & intentions.
Luckily someone in the know saw the errors and brought them to our attention otherwise someone/many may have taken your info as on the spot and made an error they could've avoided.
Remember: it's not the degree itself but the degree to which you put it, effectively, to use that matters.
Luckily someone in the know saw the errors and brought them to our attention otherwise someone/many may have taken your info as on the spot and made an error they could've avoided.
Remember: it's not the degree itself but the degree to which you put it, effectively, to use that matters.
The Black Circl
New member
Im 16 bit data hes 24
the recording I'm about to start is going to be aprox 60 minutes of material to be put on a cd.....I've had some good success recording on a tascam dp01-fxcd, but have been wondering if it is good enough...the finished recording will be mastered before it is sent out to be put on cd's and packaged....perhaps I should ask the person who will be doing the mastering.....the music will be relatively simple....acoustic guitars, bass, vocals, mandolin, perhaps some electric guitar, and even a bit of washboard.....
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
Agreed. I'd consider all that a bit more than 'typos.'
I'm not exactly disagreeing with you there, but I'm curious as to what you're using that's only 16-bit... And making blanket statements like "mastering is done in 16-bit" -- Just because you might work in 16-bit (again, can't imagine why, how or where) is misleading at best to less-experienced engineers who might actually think that's true. As much as logic and common sense would negate it.
That would make no sense - If it were actually the case. But it's not.
Most interns I've had with degrees in audio engineering and related fields have been the worst interns I've had as far as basic knowledge goes. It blows my mind what some instructors 'teach' to people... So "MY DEGREE" makes me skeptical whenever I hear it.
True story: A recent intern, which I found before he started a four- year degree course at a rather impressive school for the arts, filled me in regularly on some of the absolutely ridiculous tripe being taught in class. First day - True story - "Record as hot as you can without clipping" was part of the conversation. Honest!
Last edited:
Ethan Winer
Acoustics Expert
Yes, it will be perfectly adequate. Understand that 16-bit digital is about 20 dB quieter than the best analog tape (without noise reduction) and has 1/100th as much distortion. So if analog tape is "adequate," then 16-bit digital is even more so.
--Ethan
omtayslick
New member
Hi Ethan,
Just wondering whether you personally record in 16 or 24 bit.
No sarcasm or baiting here, it's a sincere question. (I've seen you talk about this elsewhere.)
iqi616
Yet another Mike
mrmoe, does your 16-bit recorder have 16-bit or 24-bit converters? I ask that because old gear with 16-bit converters wasn't always capable of full 16-bit resolution. If your recorder has 24-bit converters you are going to get all 16 bits.
As for quality, carefully recorded 16-bit is very adequate. A/B comparisons with 24-bit usually show a quality difference but without the benefit of A/B comparisons there are so many other factors that determine the quality of the result that it's almost impossible to say whether a recording was originally 16-bit or 24-bit.
As for quality, carefully recorded 16-bit is very adequate. A/B comparisons with 24-bit usually show a quality difference but without the benefit of A/B comparisons there are so many other factors that determine the quality of the result that it's almost impossible to say whether a recording was originally 16-bit or 24-bit.
The Black Circl
New member
If you were recording analog then his statement would be true...
My teacher has 6 emmy awards...
dualflip
Audio Engineer
Hell, where did you study???, i mean how could anyone give a degree to someone that confuses Bits with KBPS?, your teacher might have 6 emmy awards, but that doesnt make you any good, and remember a good engineer is not always a good teacher, and a good teacher is not always a good engineer.... also, dont be fooled, i also have a Major degree in Audio engineering, but that doesnt prove anything.. most of the things i've learned are by own experience and other people, the university is a nice resource but its not the absolute truth.
The Black Circl
New member
I actually was the best audio guy in the class...
...I'm not really an engineer so much as a producer, I could never think with that type of indepth knowledge of technical matters
dualflip
Audio Engineer
Then why do you keep bragging about your Degree if you dont know that much ?
The Black Circl
New member
I wasn't bragging.
I don't know anything.
I just know about music, imaging, and enough technical stuff to make the shit sound good.
Start talking about co sine and the E=MC squared and you might as well talk russian
dualflip
Audio Engineer
Well i dont think you have to know the relativity theory to understand audio, but there are some basics, bit depth is one of them... but ok i get what you mean...