Does anyone still produce or record in 16 bits

[MIROSONIC]

I still sometimes do,
and I am wondering when the change occured- where producers (especially dance music) and engineers swapped to 24 bit in huge numbers.

If it was just 6 years ago,
I still believe Cds I heard 10-15 years ago still sound fantastic in comparison.

Any views here.

[MASSIVE Master]

I think the "celebration" and enthusiasm for 24-bit digital recording was bigger and more pronounced that that of digital recording itself.

24-bit broke the boundaries - Far more dynamic range than anyone could possibly need - A gigantic step up in resolution - It very handily "took away the excuses."

That all said - The recordings sounded better 10-15 years ago because (A) the people doing the recordings had more experience, (B) levels were too loud, but not quite "absolutely f[SELF-CENSORED]ing ridiculous" as they are now.

There are plenty of other factors, of course - But those two are pretty far out in front IMO...

[Mr Phil]

You know I think music is sounding better now than it ever has. Except for the negative consequences of loudness of course.

[camerondye]

Originally Posted by Mr Phil

You know I think music is sounding better now than it ever has. Except for the negative consequences of loudness of course.

I like it just as much at least, the older stuff sounds great in it's own way and the newer stuff sounds just as great in its own way. I agree completely that overdoing the loudness thing has got to stop though...man it's just brutal.
cam

[lucey]

Originally Posted by MASSIVE Master

I think the "celebration" and enthusiasm for 24-bit digital recording was bigger and more pronounced that that of digital recording itself.

24-bit broke the boundaries - Far more dynamic range than anyone could possibly need - A gigantic step up in resolution - It very handily "took away the excuses."

That all said - The recordings sounded better 10-15 years ago because (A) the people doing the recordings had more experience, (B) levels were too loud, but not quite "absolutely f[SELF-CENSORED]ing ridiculous" as they are now.

There are plenty of other factors, of course - But those two are pretty far out in front IMO...

Agreed. It's the tracking and mix, not the bits. Sample rates and bits are way overrated.

Dan Auerback sends me his mixes at 16 bit, and they are always close to ideally balanced. Daniel Lanois has mixed to DAT even in recent years and his work sounds deep, and hardly lacking.

[masterizer]

Originally Posted by lucey

Agreed. It's the tracking and mix, not the bits. Sample rates and bits are way overrated.

Dan Auerback sends me his mixes at 16 bit, and they are always close to ideally balanced. Daniel Lanois has mixed to DAT even in recent years and his work sounds deep, and hardly lacking.

Did he track at 16 bit? I've heard of many mixers working at 16bit/44.1khz, usually tracking was done at 24bit/48khz,88.1khz or 96khz. I don't know many people using 192khz because it just takes too much space. I def agree, its not the pen that draws the picture.

[lucey]

Originally Posted by masterizer

Did he track at 16 bit? I've heard of many mixers working at 16bit/44.1khz, usually tracking was done at 24bit/48khz,88.1khz or 96khz. I don't know many people using 192khz because it just takes too much space. I def agree, its not the pen that draws the picture.

Who "he"? I think DA works with Radar ... DL with Radar and 2".

[wado1942]

I still sometimes do,
and I am wondering when the change occured- where producers (especially dance music) and engineers swapped to 24 bit in huge numbers.

I think Ethan Winer still uses 16-bit. A friend of mine in town also records 16-bit. I asked him why and he said "I've tried 24-bit and I can tell it's a better sound, I just don't think what I do warrants that resoltution." In other words, he feels his performance capabilities are a much larger harm to the sound quality than the resolution he uses. Personally, I'd say 50% more disk space is worth the theoretical 256x dynamic resolution regardless of the other conditions.

I still believe Cds I heard 10-15 years ago still sound fantastic in comparison.

Well, there was 20-bit tape back then as well. Some people had 24/96 capabilities too.
But as several had said, the loudness war plays a big part in the sound of CDs now. But also remember that most records were PERFORMED 10-15 years ago rather than being built on computers. They were also generally engineered by people who've had real hands-on training from some of the best engineers of previous generations. That system of being mentored has dissappeared so people with no engineering or musical education are now engineering music. I was just on another forum on a discussion about death metal and how the use of samples/amp simulators are in such heavy use. I made the point that it's hard to screw up an album that was already engineered before you even met the group. What I mean by that, the amp simulators have the "amp and microphone" sounds already programmed into them, the samples that are used to replace the drummer were already created, EQed, compressed etc. So for the first time in history, an album can be engineered before it's even been written. I find that very sad. Uniformity does NOT equal perfection.

I don't know many people using 192khz because it just takes too much space.

There also aren't a lot of good 192KHz ADCs out there. I have a set of 192KHz ADCs but haven't used them beyond testing because working with that much data presents some stability issues as well.

[pfosk]

keep in mind that bit depth only really limits dynamic range and the resoultion with which you can define it. Since almost all modern music is limited to hell, that shouldn't really matter any more.

Side note: its always hilarious when we get film industry clients that provide us with 16-bit audio sources and ask up up "up-res" them to 48 or 96. Its hard to not to laugh when we get paid for this. (I work in film audio post production)

[wado1942]

Well you can kindly explain that you can do the upres but there won't be any increase detail. There IS benefit of upsampling for mixing even if you're going right back down to 48KHz or whatever.

[Lute]

Still 16 bit here, my CDs like it