Electro Harmonix pedals bitrate??

  • Thread starter Thread starter dainbramage
  • Start date Start date
dainbramage

dainbramage

Well-known member
I can't seem to figure out which bitrate the following EH effect boxes have:

- Octave Multiplexer
- Metal Muff El Nano
- Holy Grail Plus

The manuals are silent on the matter.

I know the Stereo Memory Man w/ Hazarai is 24 bit. I am planning to upgrade my setup in order to record at 24 bit but am a little worried the pedals are 16 bit, as I sadly found the RC-30 Loop Station is 16 bit.

I suppose this is one of the main reasons for having analog pedals in our effects chains?
 
I can't seem to figure out which bitrate the following EH effect boxes have:

- Octave Multiplexer
- Metal Muff El Nano
- Holy Grail Plus

The manuals are silent on the matter.

I know the Stereo Memory Man w/ Hazarai is 24 bit. I am planning to upgrade my setup in order to record at 24 bit but am a little worried the pedals are 16 bit, as I sadly found the RC-30 Loop Station is 16 bit.

I suppose this is one of the main reasons for having analog pedals in our effects chains?

well ..... basically, if you like the way a pedal makes your guitar sound, what difference does it make what the bit-rate is?
ither it's a good sound or it's not. There are 24 bit pedals out there that sound crappy and plenty of 16 bit pedals that sound great.
The sound is what matters in the case of a guitar pedal ..... not how it got that sound.
 
Well said, but the thing is I'm recording completely DI (no amp, line in) and I've never tried them on a 24 bit recorder as I'm using a 16 bit one. If i upgrade my gear and start recording in 24 bits I would want to take full advantage of that.
 
Well said, but the thing is I'm recording completely DI (no amp, line in) and I've never tried them on a 24 bit recorder as I'm using a 16 bit one. If i upgrade my gear and start recording in 24 bits I would want to take full advantage of that.
it still doesn't matter.
There's no way to get a digital output on those guitar pedals.
While the fact that you're going 24 bits for the recording does mean you'll get a better recording of the pedal's sound ..... it still doesn't matter how the pedal produces the sound ..... it only matters if the sound it produces is good or not.

Now ...... if you were using something where you're getting a digital output then it might matter because your recorder would have to convert the bit rate.
But with those pedals you're gonna be using the analog output and so the ONLY thing that matters is how it sounds.
 
Let me get this straight. The digital signal in the pedals converts back to analog before running out of the pedal. I must be stupid but I can't quite seem to understand why a 16 bit signal which runs out analog wouldn't sound better if it were converted at 24 bit. In other words, I assume if the pedals were 24 bit I would notice a sound difference when recording at 24 bit and not when recording at 16 bit, right? I mean if analog signals are converted back from a 16 bit digital signal it will sort of become a 16 bit signal, quality-wise, even if it is not made of bits and bytes anymore.

I am probably wrong, but I really want to understand this.
 
And assuming we're talking a signal with an effective dynamic range of maybe 10-12dB, this is a non-issue.
 
Let me get this straight. The digital signal in the pedals converts back to analog before running out of the pedal. I must be stupid but I can't quite seem to understand why a 16 bit signal which runs out analog wouldn't sound better if it were converted at 24 bit. In other words, I assume if the pedals were 24 bit I would notice a sound difference when recording at 24 bit and not when recording at 16 bit, right? I mean if analog signals are converted back from a 16 bit digital signal it will sort of become a 16 bit signal, quality-wise, even if it is not made of bits and bytes anymore.

I am probably wrong, but I really want to understand this.
Well, first off ...... simply because something has the potential to sound better doesn't mean it will.
It's all about the implementation.
I tend not to use digital pedals at all but I have a few and one of my older delay pedals is 16bit and it sounds a thousand times better than another I have which is 24bits. For a guitar pedal the ONLY thing that matters is how it sounds at the output. And ultimately ALL digital is aimed at producing a good analog sound. The final sound is what matters and not whatever computing is going on inside the pedal.

But your question was did you need to use 24 bit pedals because you're going to 24 bit recording.
And my point is that the two are not related to each other at all.

Whether a pedal is 16 or 24 bit might make a difference in how the pedal sounds.

But going to a 24 bit recorder won't affect the sound of that pedal in any way. If it sounded good before ...... it won't sound any worse or even any different at all other than you'll possibly get a better recording of it.
Analog signals are analog signals ...... from the recorders standpoint there isn't any difference whatsoever between one that is internally 16bits or 24bits.
It's not gonna be like a pedal that always sounded good before will now sound bad because the recorder is 24bits.
When running digital signals to digital recorders you're gonna want to go with 24bits but with something like a pedal or amp the thing that matters, and the only thing, is how good the analog signal you end up with sounds.
 
And assuming we're talking a signal with an effective dynamic range of maybe 10-12dB, this is a non-issue.
There's the key... your bit rate buys you dynamic range... now what is it that a compressor does?
 
It's not gonna be like a pedal that always sounded good before will now sound bad because the recorder is 24bits.

Thank you for your detailed and well written response.

I am almost afraid to keep nagging about this but I was not thinking about any sort of compatibility issues. I was thinking a 24bit pedal might sound better if recorded and monitored in 24bit and worse if recorded and monitored in 16bit. I have never heard the sound of my pedals in anything other than 16bit monitoring and/or recording. When you say "...other than you'll possibly get a better recording of it" it seems to me that you're saying it would sound better..

Summarized question: Does a 24bit pedal usually sound better on a 24bit recording than it would on a 16 bit recording?

I am not asking whether or not a 24 bit pedal actually produces better sound than 16 bit pedals.

Sorry about this.
 
There's the key... your bit rate buys you dynamic range... now what is it that a compressor does?

I'm starting to suspect that I don't really know what bitrate is. I thought it was basically how many on-and-off-bits (0011) fit into a certain amount of .. err.. this is getting embarrasing.
 
I was thinking a 24bit pedal might sound better if recorded and monitored in 24bit and worse if recorded and monitored in 16bit.

If it sounds better or worse, it will be because of the quality of the recorder or monitoring chain. You'll be getting the same analog signal out of the pedal in either case. Given a 16-bit recorder and a 24-bit recorder of equal quality, the 24-bit recorder will sound better on dynamic material such as vocals and drums. But the signal out of your guitar and pedals won't be able to take advantage of the extra dynamic range of the recorder because their dynamic range is inherently limited.
 
Thank you for your detailed and well written response.

I am almost afraid to keep nagging about this but I was not thinking about any sort of compatibility issues. I was thinking a 24bit pedal might sound better if recorded and monitored in 24bit and worse if recorded and monitored in 16bit. I have never heard the sound of my pedals in anything other than 16bit monitoring and/or recording. When you say "...other than you'll possibly get a better recording of it" it seems to me that you're saying it would sound better..

Summarized question: Does a 24bit pedal usually sound better on a 24bit recording than it would on a 16 bit recording?

I am not asking whether or not a 24 bit pedal actually produces better sound than 16 bit pedals.

Sorry about this.
you don't have to apologize first. It's a valid question.

What I meant was that recording in 24bits might get a better recording of the 16bit pedal ..... because EVERYTHING might sound better when recorded at 24bits. NOT because the 16bit pedal now sounds bad because it's being recorded in 24bit.

Note that I said might first off. There's some disagreement over whether 24bits always sounds noticably better than 16bits in all situations. Some feel the headroom issue is the main thing and music with limited dynamic range may or may not really benefit from the extra bits.

But if we make the stipulation that the 24bit rig we're talking about does sound better than the previous 16bit recorder, ALL that means is it might capture any sound better.
Although the possibility exists that a 24bit pedal might be quieter or sound better than a 16bit pedal, what matters is the reality. DOES it sound better?

Let's look at it the other way. Let's say you get a 24bit pedal instead of a 16bit and let's say that it sounds bad ..... or at least not nearly as good as the 16bit (absolutely possible) ..... would you use the 24bit anyway?
Of course not ...... you're trying to craft a guitar sound here.

24bits is theoretically better ...... should be quieter and better processing going on. But I can guaruntee you that there are plenty of 24bit pedals that are noisier than other 16bit pedals and sound worse ..... and vice versa too.
In a pedal especially, it's the implementation that counts so you need to try some and pick one you like the sound of. And you obviously want to make sure they're not noisy since you're going direct.
For some things, as I said, I think you wanna go with 24bits but for pedals you should quit thinking about that and simply make sure you get stuff that sounds good.

Getting a good guitar sound direct is hard enough. You don't want to use bad sounding stuff simply because theoretically it ought to sound better.
 
Then there's the school of thought that says you're only hurting yourself by recording at 24 bits and then having to dither down to 16 to put it onto CD... Sometimes we all get way to technical accurate about something so arbitrary, how is the sound perceived by the listener... and I like what I'm hearing from Bob
 
If there's any question whether a pedal sounds good, take digital bitrates and converters out of the equation completely by testing the pedal straight into a guitar amp or some other straight analog amp.
 
I'm starting to suspect that I don't really know what bitrate is. I thought it was basically how many on-and-off-bits (0011) fit into a certain amount of .. err.. this is getting embarrasing.
First off -- Bit DEPTH - Not bit RATE (totally non-related thing).

Just wanted to get the terminology out of the way.

Otherwise -- Bob's thinking is solid. Adding to that, the theoretical 24-bit pedal could be quieter "at the bottom" -- You're still dealing with a signal that has - even in the extreme - a dynamic range of 40 or 50dB. As a 16-bit word length allows for 96dB, you're running around twice what you'd ever need.

24-bit sources better? Sure - if it's available. One 16-bit source in a sea of 24-bit sources being arithmetized in 32-bit (or better) floating-point? Not even noticeable. This is one of those "don't sweat the small stuff" situations.
 
Thank you all for clearing this up for me. It has been very enlightening and encouraging! After reading all this, I might just stay at 16 bit recording as I will mainly use my recordings for demo production for future bands. Great!
 
After reading all this, I might just stay at 16 bit recording as I will mainly use my recordings for demo production for future bands. Great!

It would probably be just as well. Most people listen to MP3s, which sound worse than 16-bit uncompressed audio, and can't tell the difference.
 
I'd actually recommend staying in 24-bit whenever possible. We're talking about one source with 16-bit internal processing - Not a big deal. EVERYTHING on the other hand... 1's and 0's are basically free. 65,000 possible points of resolution vs. 16.7 million possible points of resolution is free. The extra 48dB of downward headroom ("footroom?") is free. There's no reason not to take advantage of it.

True - Many people are going to be listening on horrible systems at low resolution. But even low resolution files created from high resolution files will sound better than low resolution from low resolution...
 
I'd actually recommend staying in 24-bit whenever possible. We're talking about one source with 16-bit internal processing - Not a big deal. EVERYTHING on the other hand... 1's and 0's are basically free. 65,000 possible points of resolution vs. 16.7 million possible points of resolution is free. The extra 48dB of downward headroom ("footroom?") is free. There's no reason not to take advantage of it.

True - Many people are going to be listening on horrible systems at low resolution. But even low resolution files created from high resolution files will sound better than low resolution from low resolution...
I absolutely agree ..... record in 24 bits. The OP was mistaking a guitar pedal as part of the recording chain digitally and it's not. But the recorder is recording everything and it'll be helpful enough with voices alone to be worth the 24bits.
But OP ..... the guitar pedal is like you're guitar. It doesn't matter if the pickups are 40 years old of they sound great ...... same thing wiuth the pedals.

In the sense of it's digital processing ...... it's NOT part of the consideration as to whether to record in 24bits or not.
They are two completely separate and unrelated questions.
 
I record at 24/48... plenty of resolution... but I think that bit depth has a lot less impact on the final result than the quality of analog signal it's converting... In the right room, with the right artist, a fisher price cassette can produce a better final product than a pro tools setup...
 
Back
Top