M
Mountainmirrors
kaleidoscopic renegade
What setting should I use? 16 or 24 bit?
DonF
Call Me "Grandpa"
24.
C
christiaan
Active member
24 bits is pretty much the standard nowadays. It's affordable and you shouldn't settle for less.
Chris Tondreau
Member
It depends, really. If your soundcard only supports 16 bit recording, then selecting 24 bit won't make any difference. If it does do 24 bit, then definitely go that way.
Chris
Chris
jake-owa
Banned
I only use computer recording for demos and songwriting so 16 is all I need. It uses a lot less HD and takes way less processor.
I don't think the difference is that great at a home level. I have recorded the same song in 16 and 24 before just out of curiosity and I never really heard a clear difference. My monitor system is sub $500 so that may be a part of the reason...
I don't think the difference is that great at a home level. I have recorded the same song in 16 and 24 before just out of curiosity and I never really heard a clear difference. My monitor system is sub $500 so that may be a part of the reason...
M
Mountainmirrors
kaleidoscopic renegade
So I guess 32 is even better...
Is a bit like a pixel?
Is a bit like a pixel?
T
Thom IV
New member
It depends on what you're recording for...
If you ultimately intend to burn to CD, then (from what I've been told), CDs DO NOT support 24 bit recordings. You will ultimately end up with a 16 bit format no matter what you initially record at. If, on the other hand, you are posting your stuff on the web or burning to mp3, then you would want to go the 24 or better route...
I t also depends on the equipment you are using and who your 'end listener' is going to be. If you or your intended audience is using low to middle end equipment, then it probably won't make much difference. If you or your intended audience are high end audiophiles (aren't we all??), using high end equipment, then you should probably record 24 bit.
There is some debate on this topic. Different folks will tell you different things. I say say do a little bit of both (you decide which sounds better), consider the above, and then make your decision. Just remember--there is a sacrifice you make in terms of processing capability when you go the 24 bit route, but this may be moot if your 'puter can handle it.
Tom
If you ultimately intend to burn to CD, then (from what I've been told), CDs DO NOT support 24 bit recordings. You will ultimately end up with a 16 bit format no matter what you initially record at. If, on the other hand, you are posting your stuff on the web or burning to mp3, then you would want to go the 24 or better route...
I t also depends on the equipment you are using and who your 'end listener' is going to be. If you or your intended audience is using low to middle end equipment, then it probably won't make much difference. If you or your intended audience are high end audiophiles (aren't we all??), using high end equipment, then you should probably record 24 bit.
There is some debate on this topic. Different folks will tell you different things. I say say do a little bit of both (you decide which sounds better), consider the above, and then make your decision. Just remember--there is a sacrifice you make in terms of processing capability when you go the 24 bit route, but this may be moot if your 'puter can handle it.
Tom
M
Mountainmirrors
kaleidoscopic renegade
During mastering, it gets dithered to 16 bit , right?
Stealthtech
LOGIC ABUSER
To write to CD....yesMountainmirrors said:
T
Thom IV
New member
Not sure if it's dithering that ultimately converts 24 bit to 16 bit when burning to CD...there are some things I'm still trying to get a handle on...
You'll have to do more research and ask more knowledgeable folks than I to understand the "why and wherefore" of this...
Several people on several bbs have told me that CDs support 16 bit only...(doesn't mean it's not true). I have several books that discuss this to some degree, although nothing specific to your particular question.
I'm still trying to find some corrobatory, "official" web resources that support this...if I find any, I'll try to look up this thread and let you know.
Tom
You'll have to do more research and ask more knowledgeable folks than I to understand the "why and wherefore" of this...
Several people on several bbs have told me that CDs support 16 bit only...(doesn't mean it's not true). I have several books that discuss this to some degree, although nothing specific to your particular question.
I'm still trying to find some corrobatory, "official" web resources that support this...if I find any, I'll try to look up this thread and let you know.
Tom
T
Thom IV
New member
Thanks Stealtech...
Tom
Tom
G
gordone
Well-known member
Red-book CDs (the kind you play on a home/car stereo/discman/etc...) are always 16-bit 44.1 khz. What this means is that your digital audio contains 44,100 samples a second, with each sample containing 16-bits of information.
BUT, there are many advantages to tracking/mixing 24-bit stuff, even if the final delivery is 16-bit CD audio (or even mp3s)
Here's an analogy - Say you take digital photos, manipulate them, and then eventually post them on a website. Well if you plan on doing any manipulation, you'd be better off with a higher quality image to begin with. The resulting transformations would be better on a larger file, than on a smaller file. The same holds true with audio. When you are mixing, you are digitally altering the file (or audio stream if you're not doing anything destructive to the original waves). This includes panning, faders, effects, and of course summing everything to stereo. These manipulations are much better if done at 24-bit than at 16-bit.
Now when you're ready to get the final mixdown to stereo, you have to get the 24-bit file to 16-bits, so obviously you have get rid of information on each sample. You can either simply truncate the file (just drop the higher bits) or dither, which I won't get into here, but it involves both dropping the higher bits (which you have to do anyway) but also manipulate the remaining 16-bits a certain way. I believe you're much better off if you dither rather than just truncate.
One other advantage to 24 bits is that it allows you to record your parts at a lower level and still have a fair amount of detail captured. This allows you track lower and not worry as much about clipping if you get to close to 0. With 16-bit you have to get alot closer to 0 to have the same amount of detail. With 24-bit, I routinely track between -6 and -10 and i have no problems with the quality of the tracks.
Hope that helps!
BUT, there are many advantages to tracking/mixing 24-bit stuff, even if the final delivery is 16-bit CD audio (or even mp3s)
Here's an analogy - Say you take digital photos, manipulate them, and then eventually post them on a website. Well if you plan on doing any manipulation, you'd be better off with a higher quality image to begin with. The resulting transformations would be better on a larger file, than on a smaller file. The same holds true with audio. When you are mixing, you are digitally altering the file (or audio stream if you're not doing anything destructive to the original waves). This includes panning, faders, effects, and of course summing everything to stereo. These manipulations are much better if done at 24-bit than at 16-bit.
Now when you're ready to get the final mixdown to stereo, you have to get the 24-bit file to 16-bits, so obviously you have get rid of information on each sample. You can either simply truncate the file (just drop the higher bits) or dither, which I won't get into here, but it involves both dropping the higher bits (which you have to do anyway) but also manipulate the remaining 16-bits a certain way. I believe you're much better off if you dither rather than just truncate.
One other advantage to 24 bits is that it allows you to record your parts at a lower level and still have a fair amount of detail captured. This allows you track lower and not worry as much about clipping if you get to close to 0. With 16-bit you have to get alot closer to 0 to have the same amount of detail. With 24-bit, I routinely track between -6 and -10 and i have no problems with the quality of the tracks.
Hope that helps!
Thom IV said:
James Argo
Fancy Rock N' Roll
This thread... is very interesting... All masters of digital domain shared their experience...
Jaymz
Jaymz