Sweet spot for 16bit resolution ?

[maxman65]

Hi I've found plenty of information stating that an average of -18db is optimal for recording in 24bit . Most people will be using this or higher resolution. However I can't find any information relating to 16bit. Do I assume -18dB is similarly optimal or otherwise ? Many thanks

 

[bouldersoundguy]

The noise floor of 16 bit is quite a bit higher than 24 bit, but it's still pretty decent, so -18dBFS is probably okay. I seem to recall that pro converters in the 16 bit era were often calibrated a little higher, perhaps 0dBVU = -14dBFS. The goal is to get a healthy level without clipping.

 

[maxman65]

Yes thanks . So more or less hovering around a similar level as a general recording go-to method . My standalone recorder is fairly primitive but I think this is an important aspect I've not really considered . I'd been pretty much just avoiding clipping

 

[bouldersoundguy]

Is there a reason you're not recording in 24 bit?

 

[maxman65]

Not especially . The recorder itself is 16 bit 44.1 as far as I'm aware . All the other standalone recorders on the market seem to have adopted 24 bit . The only trouble with 8 track is I may have to do a couple of bounces . Really a 12 track would be ideal . They don't make them. Zoom make a 16 but you have to switch between 1-8 then 9-16 modes So you can't actually actively mix all at one time . One set has to be kept in position . That's how I understood the review

 

[ecc83]

What is the noise floor of the 16 bit recorder? I.e. if you do a "silent" recording with all gains at minimum, where does the noise sit? -85? -90dB? The theoretical dynamic range is 96dB so if you can get around -90dBfs you are doing pretty well and it is very unlikely that the sources you use and the mic pre amps are that good? Even if the pres were that quiet it is likely you could not get the room quiet enough to take advantage of the fact?

So, bottom line, even if you kept to the -18dB fs level of 24 bits it is likely the converters would be quieter than everything else.

Dave.

 

[maxman65]

Short answer is I don't what the noise floor is for this recorder . The preamp is internal so will be pretty ordinary quality . As long as I'm recording a signal at an optimal level then that's the best I can expect . My confusion trying to research this was that all the existing information out there about recording levels related to 24 bit because that's more standard these days . So the first question which came to my head was whether it's similar for 16bit . Seems I need to be at the same kind of level even though noise floor is inherently greater in 16 bit against 24 bit

 

[ecc83]

Short answer is I don't what the noise floor is for this recorder . The preamp is internal so will be pretty ordinary quality . As long as I'm recording a signal at an optimal level then that's the best I can expect . My confusion trying to research this was that all the existing information out there about recording levels related to 24 bit because that's more standard these days . So the first question which came to my head was whether it's similar for 16bit . Seems I need to be at the same kind of level even though noise floor is inherently greater in 16 bit against 24 bit

May we know the make and model of the recorder? We can then try to find a specification (tho' there are "lies, damned lies and specifications"!) . Finding the noise floor is not difficult. As I said, plug nothing in and zero all pots. Run record for say 30 seconds. Export as wav(?) and insert into a PC and Audacity if you have nothing else should give you an idea.

Note too that the first generation USB mixers were 16 bit*. I have an early 16bit ZED 10. Such mixers were intended I am sure for band work and the record function a bit of a bonus. The noise level at the Mucky Duck from open mics and a couple of DI'ed instruments is way higher than the -90dB fs noise floor of the mixer so set to peak at -8dBfs or so will give all the dynamic range there is to be had in that situation.

Then there ARE peeps still using tape! Even with Dolby A (and how many have that?) the DR is likely no beter than 65-70dB. Eleven bits-ish!

*And they all had an inherent problem, noise spikes but these could be pushed into the noise floor and except for very demanding recording, for which the mixers were not intended, all works fine.

Dave.

 

[Mickster]

As I recall from earlier posts.....and please correct me if I'm wrong.......this OP uses a Tascam DP008ex digital stand-alone recorder. It is indeed a 16 bit unit. He is realizing a possible need to have more tracks. He mentions the Zoom R16 but laments that it displays only 8 tracks at a time while mixing. The Zoom R16 is priced significantly lower than many other stand-alone 16 tracks and can be had for a similar cost as the Tascam 8 track unit he has now. The Zoom is currently $299.99 in Sweetwater. I happen to have the R16 and originally used it to record but now use it as an AI and a control surface........for which it does an excellent job. While using it as a stand-alone you need to only push one button to swap which 8 tracks you can adjust. IMO that wasn't really a big issue and certainly was far better than having to bounce tracks only to wish I could make mix adjustments to those tracks later. Perhaps the OP could sell his Tascam to get a few $$$ towards the purchase of the Zoom.

 

[maxman65]

Yes I am tempted by the zoom r16. That It's good value for money hadn't escaped my notice. Yes bouncing tracks is really not something I ever look forward to either . I may yet go down that road

 

[Mickster]

I don't think you'll be disappointed and......as you mentioned......the value of getting a stand-alone......an AI and a Controller (if you ever go the DAW route) is outstanding. The pre's are very good IMO and the unit is very portable..........can run on batteries and is loaded with excellent track effects and mastering effects.....and like the Tascam you have.......has two built in condenser mics. Those are decent but are not as good as an external mic. Phantom power and a whole range of other features really make this unit easy to use. If I had to give a negative on anything it would be that the display is a tad bit small.........but is not really much of an issue. The current Sweetwater price is a 23% drop in price. Just my 2 cents of course.

EDIT.....another thought. A friend has the Zoom R24. Same idea.....24 tracks....and same effects...etc......but includes a pretty neat programmable drum machine if that interests you at all. Can be purchased new for around $100 more than the R16 and can be found on Ebay for a lot less. You get more tracks and a drum machine. Decent deal IMO.

 

[maxman65]

Hopefully simple to use out of the box . ? The dp008 is pretty intuitive and simple . I'm the easiest person in the world to get phased by technology . E.g.. say I want to plug the keyboard into 2 quarter inch inputs. set level. pan left and right . No Effects . Record on track one and two . I'm good to go with that ?

 

[Mickster]

Yes.......you could do that easily. Turn the unit on.....plug in the two inputs. Set track to record by pushing a button. Red track light comes on. Push Pan / EQ button on main panel upper right. Select Pan. Turn large knob on panel lower right and adjust pan for each track. So.....what I described is not in 100% detail but is basically what you'd do. The unit comes with a "Quick Start" guide which I'm guessing you can download prior to purchase.

You seem to have gotten along with the Tascam and as far as I can tell the Tascam has a dedicated pan knob for each track. That might be the main difference in that you'd go into a menu to pan on the Zoom. Easy peasy though.....really. Watch some YouTube videos for the Zoom and read the reviews. It is a very widely sold unit and is very popular. Many people have used it as their introduction to digital recording.......so.......the methodology the Zoom uses couldn't be terribly complicated or it wouldn't be so popular.

I know you're adverse to using a DAW and I can understand that if you consider yourself to have a technology phobia or dislike or general inability to soak in stuff like that.........fear not......I was exactly the same way at one time. And to be honest........I was one of those people who only liked what I could figure out without reading the full manual. I suspect you may be like that too. So...I promise you.....just start with the Quick Start guide and you'll be in business.

 

[maxman65]

Sold. Not least because I've just finally figured out I can't actually sing . So spare tracks and take the best of .

 

[Mickster]

Yup.......just keep doing vocal tracks and use the parts that work best. Maybe you need the Zoom R24.......even more tracks to use.

 

[maxman65]

Somethings going on . I did this one line near the end last night (double track vocal ) and it was pretty good . Can't remember what I did but I think I muted the first one . I'm beginning to suspect that I'm getting pitching errors somehow by listening along to the primary vocal . Anyway I'm kinda of hoping that r24 may be a bit overkill for my needs . R16 is a definite likely move

 

[Mickster]

As I recall I think you're hesitant to post any of your results. We understand that for sure. Listen......we're not going to ridicule you for ANYTHING you try to do. The entire purpose of this forum is to help out everyone by bringing together lots of people with all kinds of experiences and all kinds of knowledge so they can, hopefully, shorten the learning curve....not only for novices.....but for others who also have lots of experience. No one knows it all......but together......we know a lot. So.......what I'm saying is.....take the leap if you want to. If we can give you 5 ideas that might have taken you 5 years to figure out on your own.......then why the heck not?

As for the R24.....have one more consideration before you go with the R16. Remember when you were sure the 8 track Tascam was pretty much all you needed? So 16 tracks looks like a lot right now.........but..........what if you want to throw in one bar of something here and 4 bars of something there and use 5 tracks to record one vocal so you have all the takes you need? Or how about harmonies or added percussion elements.....etc....etc? It's not always about how many tracks your mix will end up with......it's about how many tracks you need to get there. And remember........the R24 also comes with a drum machine. Can't hurt to have that. Yes....it's likely $100 more right now.......but think about it carefully. Just sayin'. Been there myself.