R
royharper3220
New member
I have a sound card capable of 24-bit recording,but evrything in cool edit 2 is in 32 or 16 bits . so how do i record in 24-bits? and what do i select in cep 2, 32 or 16 for recording?
A
AudioMaverick
New member
Where Did I Read This?
When you record 32-bit, you are really recording 24 bit with 8 bit floating point (24.8 bit). This was always true for v1.x, but you can set CEP2 to record true 32 bit. I could not find where I read that, but it was either in the manual or in one of the setting menus.
At any rate, if you record set to 32 bit resolution, and your card only does 24... you will get the last 8 bits set to *zero*. It won't affect your recording quality. Then, it will be a good idea to edit in 32 bit so yo can truncate down after you've done modifying your tracks, That will leave the rounding errors in bits you'd be deleting, anyway.
Hope that helps. If I come across where I read that, I'll post it.
When you record 32-bit, you are really recording 24 bit with 8 bit floating point (24.8 bit). This was always true for v1.x, but you can set CEP2 to record true 32 bit. I could not find where I read that, but it was either in the manual or in one of the setting menus.
At any rate, if you record set to 32 bit resolution, and your card only does 24... you will get the last 8 bits set to *zero*. It won't affect your recording quality. Then, it will be a good idea to edit in 32 bit so yo can truncate down after you've done modifying your tracks, That will leave the rounding errors in bits you'd be deleting, anyway.
Hope that helps. If I come across where I read that, I'll post it.
R
royharper3220
New member
Thanks for the help.
dobro
Well-known member
Audio Maverick - sorry, I'm being slow on the uptake here. So, if you've got a card that does 24-bit, are you disadvantaged at all compared with a card that does 32 or above? I'm asking about both scenarios, too - floating point, and real 32-bit.
R
royharper3220
New member
I thought 24-bit was the highest available.
R
royharper3220
New member
also do i want to select (under device properties) 4-byte IEEE float for wave in? and what does try as WDM mean under it? Thanks again
Blue Bear Sound
New member
There is no 32-bit recording.... and no card that claims 32-bit word size....dobro said:
As AudioMaverick pointed out, recording s/w programs use an INTERNAL 32-bit word size to accommodate round-off error - in theory to ensure that the 24-bit wordsize is being used to its fullest potential - but it is still functionally only a 24-bit recording.
A
AudioMaverick
New member
Dobro, as Roy and Blue Bear pointed out, there really isn'y a card that records higher than 24-bit... at least as far as the general public is concerned. Never know what is on the *vaporware* workbench these days.
Here is the thing... at 16-bit resolution, you drop the mathematical noise floor to -96dB. And, at 24-bits that becomes -144dB. My Delta-1010s (which are 24-bit resolution) barely make -102dB noise... all by themselves (even though they are rated almost 10dB quieter). Then, there's microphone self-noise and noise introduced by cabling. So, in reality, recording at 16-bit resolution would yeild a really good recording.
The real quality changes can occur at higher sample rates. On another forum, I've seen pretty hot threads about reality verses imagined. But, here goes... CDs sample at 44.1kHz, which is more than enough to reproduce the *normal hearing* spectrum, up to 22.05kHz. But, raising the sample rate introduces other consideratrions -- 1. you get a faster sync. clock, which sometimes yeilds a more stable clock (not always); 2. the higher sample rate generates more samples of a given wave form, which can make a cleaner audio reproduction of the wave form; 3. the frequency ceiling gets raised letting higher frequencies, which some think improve the overall sound... if your recording equipment can capture it.
Hope that doesn't drag this thread off topic!
The WDM (Windows Dynamic Management) option is for support in Windows ME/2K/XP. They are the new way Microsoft manages drivers. Ihave heard mixed responses from others against using ASIO. Most of the time it is latency issues (adding abot 1.5mS using WDM). But, it really depends on the drivers for your sound card. For me, WinME did better with ASIO on a P3/733MHz system. Now, I am on a P4/1.9GHz WinXP system with WDM and no notable issues.
Hope this all makes a little sense. Don't go flaming this thread, if you disagree. I understand. There are way too many threads like that in archive on the other forum
>).
Here is the thing... at 16-bit resolution, you drop the mathematical noise floor to -96dB. And, at 24-bits that becomes -144dB. My Delta-1010s (which are 24-bit resolution) barely make -102dB noise... all by themselves (even though they are rated almost 10dB quieter). Then, there's microphone self-noise and noise introduced by cabling. So, in reality, recording at 16-bit resolution would yeild a really good recording.
The real quality changes can occur at higher sample rates. On another forum, I've seen pretty hot threads about reality verses imagined. But, here goes... CDs sample at 44.1kHz, which is more than enough to reproduce the *normal hearing* spectrum, up to 22.05kHz. But, raising the sample rate introduces other consideratrions -- 1. you get a faster sync. clock, which sometimes yeilds a more stable clock (not always); 2. the higher sample rate generates more samples of a given wave form, which can make a cleaner audio reproduction of the wave form; 3. the frequency ceiling gets raised letting higher frequencies, which some think improve the overall sound... if your recording equipment can capture it.
Hope that doesn't drag this thread off topic!
The WDM (Windows Dynamic Management) option is for support in Windows ME/2K/XP. They are the new way Microsoft manages drivers. Ihave heard mixed responses from others against using ASIO. Most of the time it is latency issues (adding abot 1.5mS using WDM). But, it really depends on the drivers for your sound card. For me, WinME did better with ASIO on a P3/733MHz system. Now, I am on a P4/1.9GHz WinXP system with WDM and no notable issues.
Hope this all makes a little sense. Don't go flaming this thread, if you disagree. I understand. There are way too many threads like that in archive on the other forum
>).
Last edited: