why have 24 bit when cds are 16 bit?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dopey
  • Start date Start date
D

dopey

New member
I need to get an interface that allows 4 simultaneous track recording

a lot of these cards or devices tout 24 bit.... but i know from prior experience that you can't export more than 16 bit to a cd track.

I understand that it is good to get as high a quality as you can for the raw data and that is good for mixing and making mp3s or whatever... but can someone explain why i would need more than 16 bit for when i don't plan on doing that, but mixing down to cds?

As i said- i need at least 4 tracks simultanious, My budget is about 400 USD, and I want quality, so i can wait if that isn't enough money. I don't care too too much about other stuff except phantom power would be nice..... i use nuendo, and also acid 4 but i don't think acid even supports multitrack recording. I should mention i am new to multitrack recording, since i have been using my generic interface, and working a lot with a keyboard and then just in the programs. I want to record live sessions with the band, and then go back and get better recording of the drums and maybe vocals. But i would like to be able to get some real good recordings without hiss etc....

well, thanks for any tips or other words :D
 
If 16 bits are enough for you, go for it. There are plenty of long threads archived here that cover the subject in tremendous detail. If you are actually interested in an answer to your question that would be the place to start.
 
dopey said:
why have 24 bit when cds are 16 bit?
Click to expand...
For the same reason you don't work with graphics in lo-res even though the end result may end up in 72dpi on the web.

All things being equal (A/D converters, recorders,etc...), you get better results recording to a hi-res digital format and "dumbing-down" as needed (ie for CDs or MP3s), than starting with a lower-res format and staying there.
 
Why have cars that can do 120mph when the speed limit is 70mph????

It's called "extra working room".....

Tell me which one of these numbers is more precise (and you can work more accurate math on it, as all your plug-ins have to do):

a-16digits) 1234567890ABCDEF

b-24digits) 1234567890ABCDEF12345678
 
lpdeluxe said:
If 16 bits are enough for you, go for it. There are plenty of long threads archived here that cover the subject in tremendous detail. If you are actually interested in an answer to your question that would be the place to start.
Click to expand...


ok so i know i want 24 bit just cause it is available and more room to work with, but i couldn't find any threads through the search function on the board.

Anyway, I have heard that a lot of cards/interfaces use converters, so when it says it is 24 bit, it is really only 16... and then it converts it to 24 or some such rubbish like that.

Anyway, hmm thanks for the responses, any thought on this conversion subject?
 
Hmmmm: Just to check, I searched for "bit depth" and got 500 hits on the Homerecording.com website. Why don't you try it and then ask us about anything that's not clear?
 
if you can give a quick answer...why not answer the question instead of sending someone to look it up in the halls of congress lol.

soundblaster is does the 16bit recording and 24 bit playback.

if you're suspicious of a soundcard's bit conversions...look at the specs.
 
recording in 24 bit will always gove you more headroom and room for dynamics.
 
ok well, I will search for bit depth....

I searched for key words 24 and 16

anyway, thanks everybody, I guess this was an obvious answer. Blue bear pretty much stated what i thought was the case, but it just sounded wierd in my own head.

moderators can close this thread now, thanks everybody :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top