Should I change resolution/bit depth?
- Thread starter bluedaffy
- Start date
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
Tricky one... And a lot of "that said..." to follow.
What you have is what you have. 44.1kHz files aren't going to improve by being set to 88.2kHz. That said, some EQ's might push aliasing noise higher at higher rates. But that would work the same on export (rendering to 88.2kHz is going to put those plugs in a 88.2kHz mode). THAT said, many of such plugs already calculate at the first multiple just because of that. *THAT* said, can you hear a difference if you export in both sample rates? And if so, do you actually prefer the higher rate?
On to resolution / word length -- Same sort of thing. Ideally, you should've been in 24-bit from the start (avoids additional dithering noise, improved footroom for low-level signals, etc.). If you're in 16-bit at the moment, your DAW is likely calculating in (at least) 32 bit anyway - So again, modifying individual files isn't really going to help anything.
Side note on that one (which I couldn't get another engineer to understand a few days ago) -- If all your source files are 16-bit, you should *STILL* render in 24-bit. Those calculations are being done in a floating-point architecture and the benefits of the higher resolution are still going to be intact. You can't do anything about whatever dithering noise was on the source tracks, but you don't have to add more as long as you're in 24-bit.
What you have is what you have. 44.1kHz files aren't going to improve by being set to 88.2kHz. That said, some EQ's might push aliasing noise higher at higher rates. But that would work the same on export (rendering to 88.2kHz is going to put those plugs in a 88.2kHz mode). THAT said, many of such plugs already calculate at the first multiple just because of that. *THAT* said, can you hear a difference if you export in both sample rates? And if so, do you actually prefer the higher rate?
On to resolution / word length -- Same sort of thing. Ideally, you should've been in 24-bit from the start (avoids additional dithering noise, improved footroom for low-level signals, etc.). If you're in 16-bit at the moment, your DAW is likely calculating in (at least) 32 bit anyway - So again, modifying individual files isn't really going to help anything.
Side note on that one (which I couldn't get another engineer to understand a few days ago) -- If all your source files are 16-bit, you should *STILL* render in 24-bit. Those calculations are being done in a floating-point architecture and the benefits of the higher resolution are still going to be intact. You can't do anything about whatever dithering noise was on the source tracks, but you don't have to add more as long as you're in 24-bit.
bluedaffy
New member
Wow, that's an awesome response, thank you for that! So all of my songs were originally recorded in either 24 or 32 bit (depending on what session they came from).
So I need not worry about the last little bit you posted about? The part about it being a good idea to render in 24 bit if the source was 16...
By the way, how do I do the quotation thing that I see so often in posts? the thing where I can take a selected piece of what you said and put it in my post.
So I need not worry about the last little bit you posted about? The part about it being a good idea to render in 24 bit if the source was 16...
By the way, how do I do the quotation thing that I see so often in posts? the thing where I can take a selected piece of what you said and put it in my post.
DM60
Well-known member
Check out the video referenced in this HR Thread Link. This will tell you more than you want to know. Really damn good stuff.
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
You can "Reply With Quote" --- Or simply use the "quote" tag (quote) and (/quote) using brackets instead of parentheses.
Abraham Lincoln said: