why record in 24 bit at 96khz if you can't burn at that rate?

MrZekeMan

MrZekeMan

New member
If you can only burn your CD's in 16 bit at 44.1khz why not just record in that format?

Is there any advantage to recording in 24 bit at 96khz and then converting it down when you get ready to burn to cd?

Thanks
Zeke
 
There sure is an advantage!!

When doing calculations, you loose data (limited number of bits!!). When you start with data at 24bit96kHz, you'll have alot more precision, so the calculation-error will be alot smaller. Chances are that you won't even hear them in 16bit/44.1kHz.

If you start with 16bit/44kHz, each error will be in the data that goes to your CD. (You won't necessarelly hear it, but it can't be good for your quality, right?)
 
Well...

...the biggest advantage is if you are doing any further signal processing before burning, you are much better off working with the high-res, and then dumbing down...

If you have absolutely no intention of having any further DSP or mastering (by a mastering house) done, then you can stick with 16/44 all the way thru. (For serious work, this scenario isn't too likely - you're almost always going to want to tweak something post-mixdown!)

Bruce
 
Mass agreeance here.... start with 16bit/44.1khz and do some processing on it and mix down...listen to it on some decent monitors and tell me if you can call it CD quality....

Im just starting to work with 24bit/48khz (dont have the room for 96)....big difference...and as terrible as i am at this I need all the help I can get....
 
'preciate it

Thanks guys,

I'm a total green horn. I don't even have any equiptment yet. I have a VS-2480 ordered from Sweetwater. They're supposed to ship me one out as soon as they get them in.

I'm trying to learn all I can now, so I'll be more in the know when it arrives. I've learned a tremendous amount already from reading the post's. I have a Notepad file that I am copying and pasting all the tips that I want to keep.



Thanks for sharing your experience guys.

Take it easy,
Zeke
 
When doing calculations, you loose data

What are calculations?

Im just starting to work with 24bit/48khz

How does the bit rate and sample rate differ when it comes to hiding these calculations, or how do they differ in the way effect the sound quality when adding processing when mixing down?


Thanks again
Zeke
 
When working with an Analog signal (like playing back tape) and running it through an effects box (say reverb) you are altering the sound "waves". Digital audio is stored as binary info, basicly a series of 0s and 1s. If you use a computer program to add (for example) reverb to a sound file on your computer, you are using math calculations to digitally duplicate what a effects box would have done. So if your original data is more presisely represented by a larger number of 0s and 1s, you can make more presise alterations to it.

Now having said that, I should admit that in my case I don't completely follow this advise. My hardware supports 24 bit, 48K recording. There is a LARGE and clearly audible difference in 16 vs 24 bit. However I could hear no clear difference in my test recording of 44.1 vs 48. Since everything has to ultimately go to 16 bit / 44.1, and since my program of choice does 24 to 16 but NOT 48 to 44 conversion, I record everything at 24 bit / 44.1 and then convert the final stereo master track to 16 bit.
 
hmmmm....

That makes sense to me.

Im curious what was the audible difference that you heard between the 16 bit and and the 24 bit?

zeke
 
Check out these sites....

http://www.sae.edu/freeonlineuniversity/
(Click on "equipment", then the "recorders" tab at the top of the page, and scroll down to "digital recorders"). There's some very good and easy to understand explainations there and also a few pictures.

And if you're feeling brave you can try to tackle this page. It's a bit long but very very good, also check out the other links thoughout the page as some of those are very good too. I would definitly recommend reading the above link first, this site may be complicated at first.

http://www.digido.com/ditheressay.html


I hope these help

-tkr
 
Umm.. the audible difference was that it sounded better! Not sure how else to describe it, it's something you need to listen to.

I have yet to hear any raw recorded audio at 96 since, as I said, my hardware does not support it. The article Bruce mentioned sumed up the advantages of 96 very nicely. Until recently recording at 96 had the additional draw back of creating much bigger files, but as hard drive sizes have gone up and prices have come down that is not a big issue anymore.
 
Last edited:
good reading

Those sites offered some fascinating reading, although some of it was definately over my head.

It seems to me the gist of it was to avoid manipulating the recording as much as possible after the fact, in order to minimize deterioration.

I wonder....does using these calculations or DSP at the time of recording corrupt the digital word in the same manner as it does if the tracks are recorded dry and then processing added later?

It seems to me that the ideal situation from a sound quality stand point, would be to use outboard effects and record wet. Or is it???

That's not really an option for me though. With no recording experience I no doubt wouldn't have the experience to know the proper amount of processing to add at the time of recording to make all the tracks sound good together. Maybe in the future after I have some time on the DAW under my belt.

Thanks for the links, I definately learned a lot from this thread.

Zeke
 
as an engineer the fact is that if your d/a conversion is of 16 bit res. you are only going to get about 14 bit resolution because two of these bits are used for parity. but you also dont need inputs with more than 20 bit rsolution to get cd quality on your cds. the clincher is that higher resolutions sound more detailed on your monitors and you will notice that . what is over the horizon is dvd burning hardware for masters. ive seen one for under 500 bucks and when you get that puppy that 24 or 32 bit resolution on your inputs will kick ass. so if all you want is cd quality go for a turtle beach card with 20 bit res because its inexpensive and not full of problems.
 
darrin_h2000 said:
as an engineer the fact is that if your d/a conversion is of 16 bit res. you are only going to get about 14 bit resolution because two of these bits are used for parity. but you also dont need inputs with more than 20 bit rsolution to get cd quality on your cds.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but you're over-simplifying to the point of being misleading... this site explains the background details much more clearly --> http://csunix1.lvc.edu/~snyder/3ch15.html

Bruce
 
Wheeeew!!!

Bruce,

Again, thanks for the link. That is incredible. It staggers the imagination that someone would first, be able to dream all that up, and secondly put it into force in the real world with electronic equipment.

I'll have new respect now any time I listen to a compact disk, or any digital audio for that matter. It's amazing that all those mathematical calculations and functions are being performed at such an incredible rate of speed.

Zeke
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top