Calling all Gearslutz gurus..............

tommyd · 21st August 2003

......and all who care to join in! Starting a new project and looking for advice, insight, ideas, knowledge, and inspiration. (all the stuff I get here at Gearslutz).. on to the point
I'm starting work on a project that was originally recorded live in a club, balanced splitter snake to a recording studio next door, to a Sony 3324. The sessions were recording at 48 /16. I transferred the sessions digitally via IZ UFC-AES/ebu to PT HD at 48/16 to be "finished" and then on to mixing.(I'll get to finishing in a sec) As live goes, the performances and sounds are pretty good and the seperation is remarkably good. Even though it will be a "live " cd, there' going to be some vocals redone or tuned (argh), possibly some instruments, and the drums beefed up. As for mixing the end game is uncertain. Could possibly be done through a console at a studio yet to be named, but most likely will be done in the box with my outboard toys. So finally on to my question.......
Would there be any advantage converting the sessions to 48 /24 or even 96/24 before ANYTHING is done? I can see the advantage for any new stuff recorded, but I'm wondering if this would be a plus when going out and back in to outboard during mixing.
Looking back I think I've rambled enough, thanks in advance for any and all input
TommyD

Jules · 21st August 2003

No,

Run it at the original Sample Rate 48k/16bit BUT within a 48k/24bit PT session (24 bit to get the best headroom etc)

The 16 bit files dont hneed 'conversion to do this' they just sit in the 24 bit session 'happy'.

DONT monkey around and convert it all, it will only get worse.

Like cooking meat, (August seems 'food analogy' month here on GS!) the less you poke at it the tastier it will turn out

You can SRC the whole mix later and dither to 16bit

joeq · 21st August 2003

I recently did a very similar project. Live recording at 16 bit (why oh why?) some sweetening back at the studio and mix in the box. My research indicated that it wouldn't hurt to bump it up to 24 bits so I did. In fact, the transfer place just about assumed I would want it that way

I was happy with the results though I didn't have the time to do a flat out comparison test with the 16 bit.

What I read was that your plug-ins should all work better at the higher numbers, and some say fader moves too. Your original audio is not going to suddenly sound better if it is bumped up , but if you are applying any digital processes to modify your audio the more resolution the smoother the result. It made sense to me so I added those zeroes.

Some of the tunes had several overdubs including some vocals- having those at higher res probably adds up to something.

I didn't try bumping up to a higher sampling rate only because of the disk space required (it was 32 tracks of a 3 hour show) The file size hit you take for going from 16 bits to 24 bits is not as bad as when you go from 48k to 96k

Jules · 21st August 2003

Aggggh! I think we need some clarity here!

Plug in operation WITHIN 24 bit sessions might sound / work better

But I dont think converting all the files TO 24 BIT is a requirement to get that benefit!

16 bit files can sit there happy and run through the 24 bit mixer & plugins just fine! No need to mess with em! conversion however - WILL BE a backward qualitative step I am convinced!

tutt

tommyd · 21st August 2003

Good information on both sides here, I've got some more thoughts I'll have to post this afternoon. Gotta run to a session. Thanks guys, and please keep it coming!

TommyD

Steve Smith · 21st August 2003

Quote:

Originally posted by Jules
Aggggh! I think we need some clarity here!

Plug in operation WITHIN 24 bit sessions might sound / work better

But I dont think converting all the files TO 24 BIT is a requirement to get that benefit!

16 bit files can sit there happy and run through the 24 bit mixer & plugins just fine! No need to mess with em! conversion however - WILL BE a backward qualitative step I am convinced!

tutt

I am pretty sure I agree with Jules... just import them into a 24 bit session. All will be better at 24 bit, but there is no reason to convert the bit rate, PT will do what it needs to to be happy.. the last thing you want in any digital operation is more unessacary conversions of any kind IMHO.

gsharp · 21st August 2003

Pro Tools will "convert" the bit rate for you on the way in to the 24 bit session by harmlessly adding 8 zero's to everything. I don't think it actually helps the plug-ins themselves since they'll still do their thing at 48 bit or whatever they are, but then where it will really help (which is what Jules might have meant anyway) is when the output of said plugins get truncated (or dithered if you're running the dithered mixer) back down and sent to the mixer. Better to have that be to 24 bits than 16 bits. Also, the DSP done to calculate fader moves, pans, etc.. will be at 24 bit. All good reasons to run 24 even though the original audio is 16.

g

tommyd · 22nd August 2003

THanks all, appreciate the input. My thought was, if PT "converts" 16bit audio files to 24bit when importing them into a 24bit session, couldn't I just "save session copy as" and select 24bit in the options window to get the same end result? Are these two processes not the same?
And on sample rate... as there will probably be additional audio recorded, and in mixing outboard devices used meaning more AD/DA processing , would I benefit going to 96 during this process? I understand the "voodoo" involved getting back to 44/16 for the end result, but this project will probably go to a proper mastering house for that. Mixing will probably be brought back to PT as 96/24 files to be delivered for mastering, so they can use the big toys for final processing.

As usual, I've gotten good food for thought here, thanks again guys!

Side note; Steve, I'm trying to figure out if I know you from somewhere. Born and raised Missouri boy here, live in St. Joe now (ugh) Was in L.A. for about 10 years, played the K.C. area alot and used to be the drummer for the Elders. pm me if you fell like it ,would love to chat, or maybe set up a midwest Gearslutz gathering

Thanks again,
TommyD

21st August 2003	#1
tommyd Gear addict Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Springfield, MO Posts: 494 Thread Starter	Calling all Gearslutz gurus.............. ......and all who care to join in! Starting a new project and looking for advice, insight, ideas, knowledge, and inspiration. (all the stuff I get here at Gearslutz).. on to the point I'm starting work on a project that was originally recorded live in a club, balanced splitter snake to a recording studio next door, to a Sony 3324. The sessions were recording at 48 /16. I transferred the sessions digitally via IZ UFC-AES/ebu to PT HD at 48/16 to be "finished" and then on to mixing.(I'll get to finishing in a sec) As live goes, the performances and sounds are pretty good and the seperation is remarkably good. Even though it will be a "live " cd, there' going to be some vocals redone or tuned (argh), possibly some instruments, and the drums beefed up. As for mixing the end game is uncertain. Could possibly be done through a console at a studio yet to be named, but most likely will be done in the box with my outboard toys. So finally on to my question....... Would there be any advantage converting the sessions to 48 /24 or even 96/24 before ANYTHING is done? I can see the advantage for any new stuff recorded, but I'm wondering if this would be a plus when going out and back in to outboard during mixing. Looking back I think I've rambled enough, thanks in advance for any and all input TommyD

21st August 2003	#2
Jules Gearslutz.com admin Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: A Yank in London, UK Posts: 17,356 1 Review written	No, Run it at the original Sample Rate 48k/16bit BUT within a 48k/24bit PT session (24 bit to get the best headroom etc) The 16 bit files dont hneed 'conversion to do this' they just sit in the 24 bit session 'happy'. DONT monkey around and convert it all, it will only get worse. Like cooking meat, (August seems 'food analogy' month here on GS!) the less you poke at it the tastier it will turn out You can SRC the whole mix later and dither to 16bit __________________ Jules Add your reviews to the new reviews area! Gearslutz on Facebook Follow my GS picks on Twitter

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Calling All Guitar Amp Gurus	phaedrus	So much gear, so little time!	14	18th September 2008 03:22 PM
Calling all JAPANESE gearslutz	superburtm	So much gear, so little time!	3	4th January 2008 12:18 PM
Calling all ITB Nuendo & Lynx audio gurus to help with tracking latency	xj32	Music computers	4	23rd May 2006 04:28 AM
Calling all Low End Gearslutz!!	fross	Low End Theory	9	12th September 2005 03:35 AM
Calling all Torontonians for Gearslutz/ R-E-P pub night!!	saskatchewan	So much gear, so little time!	32	21st May 2005 06:02 AM

21st August 2003	#3
joeq Lives for gear Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: New York Posts: 9,248	I recently did a very similar project. Live recording at 16 bit (why oh why?) some sweetening back at the studio and mix in the box. My research indicated that it wouldn't hurt to bump it up to 24 bits so I did. In fact, the transfer place just about assumed I would want it that way I was happy with the results though I didn't have the time to do a flat out comparison test with the 16 bit. What I read was that your plug-ins should all work better at the higher numbers, and some say fader moves too. Your original audio is not going to suddenly sound better if it is bumped up , but if you are applying any digital processes to modify your audio the more resolution the smoother the result. It made sense to me so I added those zeroes. Some of the tunes had several overdubs including some vocals- having those at higher res probably adds up to something. I didn't try bumping up to a higher sampling rate only because of the disk space required (it was 32 tracks of a 3 hour show) The file size hit you take for going from 16 bits to 24 bits is not as bad as when you go from 48k to 96k

21st August 2003	#7
gsharp Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 722	Pro Tools will "convert" the bit rate for you on the way in to the 24 bit session by harmlessly adding 8 zero's to everything. I don't think it actually helps the plug-ins themselves since they'll still do their thing at 48 bit or whatever they are, but then where it will really help (which is what Jules might have meant anyway) is when the output of said plugins get truncated (or dithered if you're running the dithered mixer) back down and sent to the mixer. Better to have that be to 24 bits than 16 bits. Also, the DSP done to calculate fader moves, pans, etc.. will be at 24 bit. All good reasons to run 24 even though the original audio is 16. g

22nd August 2003	#8
tommyd Gear addict Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Springfield, MO Posts: 494 Thread Starter	THanks all, appreciate the input. My thought was, if PT "converts" 16bit audio files to 24bit when importing them into a 24bit session, couldn't I just "save session copy as" and select 24bit in the options window to get the same end result? Are these two processes not the same? And on sample rate... as there will probably be additional audio recorded, and in mixing outboard devices used meaning more AD/DA processing , would I benefit going to 96 during this process? I understand the "voodoo" involved getting back to 44/16 for the end result, but this project will probably go to a proper mastering house for that. Mixing will probably be brought back to PT as 96/24 files to be delivered for mastering, so they can use the big toys for final processing. As usual, I've gotten good food for thought here, thanks again guys! Side note; Steve, I'm trying to figure out if I know you from somewhere. Born and raised Missouri boy here, live in St. Joe now (ugh) Was in L.A. for about 10 years, played the K.C. area alot and used to be the drummer for the Elders. pm me if you fell like it ,would love to chat, or maybe set up a midwest Gearslutz gathering Thanks again, TommyD