Advice on Bit Depth for recording

Hi:
I am using a Sony Acid Music 9.0 Software to record my music. Whenever I start a new song and I go to File > New, in the Audio tab, it gives me a choice of Bit Depth. The program has 8, 16, and 24-bit choices, but its default bit depth is 16, so I have always recorded with 16 bit depth and not bothered to change that. I have two questions.
1. Is there noticeable difference when a recording is done at 24-bit depth as opposed to 16-bit depth? I am asking because I used to record with a VS-1880 standalone multi-track recorder which was recording at 24-bit, and the vocal tracks seemed to come out much better (i.e. cleaner and more distinct with the "s", "k" and "f" sounds in the lyrics coming out more clearly) than what I am getting with the Acid Music software.

2. If I have already laid track with the Sony Acid Music software with 16 bit depth, can I continue laying more tracks on the same song with 24-bit, or not?

Thanks.
Patrick
 
A lot of people like 24-bit for the reason you describe. Not a real big deal for others.
 
The difference between 16 and 24 bit shouldnt be the difference in clarity, it should just be the difference in noise floor.

The difference you are hearing is the different mic preamp and converters that you are using.

24 bit is preferable because of the lower noise floor.
 
Ya, it's hard to know what is electronics and what is the format. There's 384k pcm and 256DSD and the struggle continues One DAW opens up 16-bit and another open 24-bit by default - I don't really care unless I plan to manipulate the data a lot.
 
The adantage to more bit depth is a lower noise floor. This allows you to record at lower levels without concequence. Also, as you add tracks, the noise floor adds up as well. Lowering the noise floor of each track by recording 24 bit, will lower the noise floor of thd mix.
 
That can be an advantage, for sure. It may not be a everyday advantage, though. Plenty of people do their own testing to determine if they need 24-bit. It's quite possible people would rather not do the downsample if the objective is 16-bit, etc..

Patrick, needs to determine how he wants to go. We don't know how the 16-bit Acid tracks got there (cheap/expensive interface), or if he monitors off the VS outs that might sound better than some other device, etc..
 
The noise of several 16 bit tracks being mixed down to a 16 bit mix will be much greater than 24 bit tracks being mixed down to a 16 bit mix. The noise floor of the 24 bit tracks will be truncated during mixdown.

No downsampling required. Just mix directly to 16 bit, if it wont be mastered.

There is no downside to recording 24 bit, other than a little hard drive space.
 
So this is a follow-up question. From your responses I understand that 24-bit lowers the noise floor compared to 16-bit, so if I am going to record a lot of tracks for one song then I am better off going with the 24-bit. Now if sound clarity has more to do with the type of PC interface, what PC interface(s) would you suggest for me to use that its noticeably better for sound quality than what I am using now (Tascam US-1641 and Tascam 16X08)? Thank you.
 
Unfortunately, I haven't looked for an interface on that end of the spectrum for quite some time. So everything I know is horribly out of date.

However, the preamp/converters on the Roland VS series were really thin and bright sounding, compared to higher quality stuff. So chasing that sound might not be the best idea.

Someone else will have to comment on what is better than the tascam interfaces. (if anything exists in that pricerange that is any better)
 
What sounds good today, might not be good tomorrow : ) You don't have to use a interface for output. At this computer, there's the on-board sound, a Tascam US-144 mk2, a 384k DSD DAC, and I removed a NOS Philips 1543 DAC recently. The only good sound out of the lot comes from a 85watt amp from the late seventies. In the music room, I always have the Gina 3g, or, Layla 3g hooked-up, but I can listen to a number of DAC sections and power amps. Probably, my favorite in that room is a old 16-bit Fostex 8-track.

Here's the guts of a Prisim
 

Attachments

  • prism_lyra_crop.jpg
    prism_lyra_crop.jpg
    427.1 KB · Views: 2
What sounds good today, might not be good tomorrow : ) You don't have to use a interface for output. At this computer, there's the on-board sound, a Tascam US-144 mk2, a 384k DSD DAC, and I removed a NOS Philips 1543 DAC recently. The only good sound out of the lot comes from a 85watt amp from the late seventies. In the music room, I always have the Gina 3g, or, Layla 3g hooked-up, but I can listen to a number of DAC sections and power amps. Probably, my favorite in that room is a old 16-bit Fostex 8-track.

Here's the guts of a Prisim
Umm....What?

I don't get how this relates to this thread at all.
 
..."what PC interface(s) would you suggest for me to use that its noticeably better for sound quality than what I am using now"

Too many to count. But Prism is on the web, if you want to start somewhere
 
Since the tascam interfaces he mentioned are about $250 for 16 mic preamps, I'm not sure the $1700 Prism DAC will do him much good. Since it has no analog inputs, much less 16 with mic preamps.

In fact, none of the interfaces have enough inputs...

Then you mentioned that the only thing that sounded decent was an old stereo power amp from the 70's (not an interface), and an old 16 bit fostex 8-track (which is a re-branded ADAT machine and not an interface) That's where you completely lost us.
 
I have a feeling that the hacking/closure of 'Recordingreview.com' may have something to do with the weirdness going on here. IDK.
 
.."$250 for 16 mic preamps"

Well, how cheap can we get. Still, Cheap has reached a great level, on the whole. Just don't push it : )

The other stuff is just what sounds good. I'm just trying to suggest what sounds good today, might not sound good tomorrow. Maybe we find something that sounds good decade, after decade. All the Electronic MFG have to give us the latest and greatest, but that doesn't always mean it's better than last years model.

It's simply plugging in the fones for the first time and saying to yourself; " That sounds good". As far as my interfaces go, I think my old Gina 20-bit sounds better than the newer 3g stuff. Short on features in comparison, but I think it does recording and playback better. It's not hooked up, of course : )

The nude PIC I posted is the basic 2-channel - meant to illustrate circuitry. The 8-channel USB models are 18 I/O - so we can plug in that classy ada8000. hah
 
Back
Top