Which is the correct reason to do that.Drumwaiter wrote:... because I dont' notice the difference.
Malcolm Boyce wrote:Which is the correct reason to do that.Drumwaiter wrote:... because I dont' notice the difference.
There are many recording at 96K or higher, who don't hear a difference, but think they should.
24bit files are 50% larger than 16bit.macrae11 wrote:16 bit files aren't a whole lot smaller than 24 bit,....
Adding bit "depth" to a file means that anything you do with it further down the line will benefit from the change. Keep working at 24bit.Drumwaiter wrote:Here's a question. My Kurz will forever be locked at 16bit even with the DMTi. Are there any reasons why I can't have my projects at 24bit? I know that my sample rate has to line up to sync properly, but what about bit depth?
There is absolutely nothing negative about increasing bit depth. There is no "conversion" it just adds empty bits to the "bottom" of the file. That's why it happens instantly when you do it in your DAW as opposed to other processes which are actually crunching numbers like sample rate conversion or decreasing bit depth.Drumwaiter wrote:So even if when if my keyboard outputs only 16 or 20 bit depth, having my DAW set to 24 won't affect anything negatively? I guess I'm just trying to figure out at which part of the conversion the bit depth is chosen. Can someone clarify this?
Tweak wrote:So what's that? You want to hear what _I_ think. Ok, this is the gospel according to Tweak! Use 24 bit for every recording if you have this feature. I was a believer for the past decade that 16 bit was the way to go and I have absolutely changed my mind. No matter of what you are recording this is true. If you have a nice mic, a very good preamp and a clean audio system and are recording highly dynamic instruments such as acoustic guitars, classical orchestras, acapella vocals, the difference will be there.
Regarding the sample rate, unless you have a good reason not to, use a sample rate of 44.1. If you are doing audio for video you might want to use 48 khz as many editors only use that rate. Some kinds of music seem to benefit slightly from the high resolution of 88.2 or 96 khz. Acoustic instruments, like guitars, percussion, and of course vocals, i.e., things with delicate high frequencies seem to benefit but its subtle. Lets say you had a $399 audio interface with onboard preamps. Replacing your preamp and converters with better ones will give you more of a sonic difference at 44.1 that recording at 96khz will.
Once inside the sequencer, audio files may be converted to 32 bit for processing and converted back to 24 or 16 on the way out. So, my advice is to record at 24 bits/44.1 at minimum and go up to a sample rate of 88.2 or 96 if you think your material warrants it (and you have the disk space.)
Malcolm Boyce wrote:24bit files are 50% larger than 16bit.macrae11 wrote:16 bit files aren't a whole lot smaller than 24 bit,....
The DAW is basically adding more numbers for it to work with. Think of it as adding more decimal points when doing any type of math. When you add more bits, you start by just adding 8 more "Zeros" but as soon as you do any work or "calculations" you start using those extra decimal points.Drumwaiter wrote:Still though, is the DAW adding the depth that it perceives or is it from the converter? Where does it happen?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests