The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
16 bit ~ are you there ?
Old 20th August 2007
  #1
Gear Guru
 
AllAboutTone's Avatar
 

16 bit ~ are you there ?

Is 16 bit multitrack being used in your project studio ? what's your pro's and con's of it vs 24 bit.








Mike Vick. You are one of the best to play the game but " Stay away from my Dog "
Old 21st August 2007
  #2
Lives for gear
 
lowfreq33's Avatar
 

There's no reason not to go 24 bit. World of difference.
Old 21st August 2007
  #3
Lives for gear
 

I track on a Mackie SDR, and a few times, I neglected to notice that the deck had defaulted to 16 bit. The thing I've noticed is that drum tracks are punchier than at 24 bit, less work when mixing to get them where I want. If the style and arrangement suggests a more two dimensional, low dynamic range "in yer face" approach, I'd consider 16 bit.
Old 21st August 2007
  #4
Gear Addict
 
mOjO FET's Avatar
 

Whatever works.

Michael
Old 21st August 2007
  #5
Gear Guru
 
AllAboutTone's Avatar
 

thanks, keep them coming
24 bit has it place in the market by all means but alot of times i get what i want out of 16 bit rather than 24, again i still think some of this is different makes of converters etc...

Again if you feel the need for 16 bit let us know ?
thanks in advance.




Mike Vick. You are one of the best to play the game but " Stay away from my Dog "
Old 21st August 2007
  #6
Gear Guru
 
AllAboutTone's Avatar
 

bump, just checking to see if they are a few more heh
Old 21st August 2007
  #7
Gear Addict
 
erosconpollo's Avatar
Since a lot of my stuff begins its life on an older Fostex recorder that only does 16 bit, I end up using it on quite a few projects. Properly utilized, there is nothing wrong with 16.
Old 21st August 2007
  #8
Lives for gear
 
TurboJets's Avatar
Sonically I hear a big difference between 16 and 24bit - more transients, more of the acoustic qualities of the room, the structural qualities of the instrument and technique of the musician - the important stuff - e.g., reflections in the room, harmonics from fretted instruments, mood and depth of the vocals, etc..

Undeniably and inarguably you're getting more information on your recordings. More information equates to more dimension, more realism, more of the magic of the performance. If you have the ablility to track at 24bit there's not reason not to. People can argue their opinion on the matter (and do) but you can't trump the science.
Old 21st August 2007
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Tone Laborer's Avatar
There are still people recording at 16 bit?


24 bit- for me. It sounds better and there's not a single reason not to in my case.
Old 21st August 2007
  #10
Gear Guru
 
AllAboutTone's Avatar
 

What i hear between the two....... example (Drum Tracks) The drum are more in your face, also when i record at 24 bit i end up using more mids and highs in the eq and sometimes still not happy, I recorded a band a few weeks ago at 16 bit and then they came back and did some songs over so i used 24 bit the 2nd time. The 16 bit sounded much better, im some ways it was almost like the 24 bit had dolby.
The 24 bit has lush lows but not as tight as the 16 bit on the lower scale.
The 16 bit was very tight on the low end but the high end could get thin if not careful.

again there is a need for both...


bump.....
Old 21st August 2007
  #11
Lives for gear
 
John Suitcase's Avatar
 

I use 24-bit, but if I were working on a smaller, less-powerful system, I'd use 16. I've mixed projects that were recorded at 16bit, and they came out fine. There is a difference, of course, and I find that 24bit sounds more realistic, and smoother, but it does take more disk space, more processing power, etc.

From a dynamic range perspective, 24bit has a lower noise floor, but really, sample rate has a bigger influence. But, even there, I rarely go above 44k, since I can't hear those frequencies above 22khz. In fact, I usually low-pass the 2 buss, at around 16k. That might sound crazy, but converters do some weird stuff as you approach the nyquist frequency, and I find the recordings just sound less digital/harsh.

But 16 bit would really only be a problem if the noise floor is a problem. In rock music, noise isn't usually a big problem. In classical, jazz, acoustic, it is. If you're recording a punk band, you're not going to suffer if you track at 16bit, and like I said, the processing and storage advantages could be significant.
Old 21st August 2007
  #12
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
16 really just sounds more digital to me. As if everything below the knees was cut off. Of course good mixes are possible at 16, but why bother?
Old 22nd August 2007
  #13
One with big hooves
 
Jay Kahrs's Avatar
I'd rather have a good 16-bit converter then some krap 24-bit one.

Good deals to be had on old Apogees & whatnot...
Old 22nd August 2007
  #14
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
I neglected to notice that the deck had defaulted to 16 bit
this happened to me a little while back...i re-formatted my HD, re-installed everything, and thought i had everything configured how i needed/wanted it to be

then i cut a live punk EP, and noticed during mixdown that i hadn't changed the sample rate to 24-bit. oops on my part.

good thing it was punk rock...it ended up actually sounding just about perfect, so all was good in the end.
Old 22nd August 2007
  #15
Gear Guru
 
AllAboutTone's Avatar
 

I see your point in that you could do without the 24 bit due to punk band, because punk is a little bit thin and on the guitar side heavy as well. My question is, i see what 24 bit delivers in depth, headroom etc...but what do you do with all this lush low end that 24 bit gives ? even with compressors etc the bottom end is a little much on a cheap stereo but great for top $$ ones.
Old 22nd August 2007
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
even with compressors etc the bottom end is a little much on a cheap stereo but great for top $$ ones.
Amen. I find myself doing a low shelf cut from between 70 and 90 Hz by about 1 dB on most 24 bit mixes to make them boombox friendly. Even without that, I typically do the old fashioned, RIAA high pass treatment at 30 Hz and 12 dB/oct.
Old 22nd August 2007
  #17
Here for the gear
 

I've experimented with 16, 24, 32 and 64 bit.

16 sounds good--I don't find it thin at all and has a much lower noise floor. I have no problem recording at 16-bit. Sure, it's not tape but I'd rather not have the hassle of a tape machine right now.

24 is great--a little fatter with more realism to the low end, but a higher noise floor on quiet instruments such as acoustic guitar and soft vocals, cello--that sort of thing.

32 didn't sound that much better than 24 to me but...

64 was the bomb. Suddenly a quiet noise floor, thick lows, sparkling highs. I think a higher bit rate might be more important than the sample rate. At least to my ears. But the file size--whew!!!

I say use what works for your system the best. If your computer is happy chugging away at 24 or 32 bit then go for it, if you can do 64-bit, yes, it'll sound good but can your system handle it? And if you're good at mixing then no one will ever know you recorded everything at 16-bit and made it work for you will they? And will anyone really care?
Old 22nd August 2007
  #18
Here for the gear
 
The 3rd Flaw's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rulesforradicals View Post
I've experimented with 16, 24, 32 and 64 bit.

16 sounds good--I don't find it thin at all and has a much lower noise floor. I have no problem recording at 16-bit. Sure, it's not tape but I'd rather not have the hassle of a tape machine right now.

24 is great--a little fatter with more realism to the low end, but a higher noise floor on quiet instruments such as acoustic guitar and soft vocals, cello--that sort of thing.

32 didn't sound that much better than 24 to me but...

64 was the bomb. Suddenly a quiet noise floor, thick lows, sparkling highs. I think a higher bit rate might be more important than the sample rate. At least to my ears. But the file size--whew!!!

I say use what works for your system the best. If your computer is happy chugging away at 24 or 32 bit then go for it, if you can do 64-bit, yes, it'll sound good but can your system handle it? And if you're good at mixing then no one will ever know you recorded everything at 16-bit and made it work for you will they? And will anyone really care?
Just out of interest - what system are you using for 64-bit?
Old 22nd August 2007
  #19
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Just out of interest - what system are you using for 64-bit?
I'm using Sonar but only rarely at 32-bit and only for 64 as a test for my own purposes. Sounds great but you can't run a lot of tracks at a time and uses a ton of file space.
Old 22nd August 2007
  #20
Here for the gear
 
The 3rd Flaw's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rulesforradicals View Post
I'm using Sonar but only rarely at 32-bit and only for 64 as a test for my own purposes. Sounds great but you can't run a lot of tracks at a time and uses a ton of file space.
And which audio interface?
Old 22nd August 2007
  #21
Here for the gear
 

RME 5296. 40 channels of ADAT, 4 channels SPDIF into a 2.6 Ghz Pentium PC. Runs good at 16 and 24-bit, slower at 32, struggles at 64 and rightly so.
Old 22nd August 2007
  #22
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
I'd rather have a good 16-bit converter then some krap 24-bit one.
I'll second that!
Old 23rd August 2007
  #23
Dor
Lives for gear
 
Dor's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by rulesforradicals View Post
RME 5296. 40 channels of ADAT, 4 channels SPDIF into a 2.6 Ghz Pentium PC. Runs good at 16 and 24-bit, slower at 32, struggles at 64 and rightly so.
That card is 24 bit.

RME Hammerfall HDSP 96/52
24-bit/96kHz PCI Audio Card with 24-ch ADAT, 2-ch S/PDIF, MIDI, and Word Clock I/O
Old 23rd August 2007
  #24
Gear Addict
 
hle144's Avatar
 

16 bits has left the building.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #25
Lives for gear
 

According to that sos interview CLA is still using 16 bits.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #26
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by rulesforradicals View Post
RME 5296. 40 channels of ADAT, 4 channels SPDIF into a 2.6 Ghz Pentium PC. Runs good at 16 and 24-bit, slower at 32, struggles at 64 and rightly so.
64 bit is the internal processing I believe (processing for plugins, etc). I don't think any A/D converters record more than 24 bits.

Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Then there is 1 bit recording............The fattest of them all supposedly. (DSD)
Old 23rd August 2007
  #27
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
That card is 24 bit.

RME Hammerfall HDSP 96/52
24-bit/96kHz PCI Audio Card with 24-ch ADAT, 2-ch S/PDIF, MIDI, and Word Clock I/O
True. But the signal is recorded as 64-bits (or 32, 16, whatever) in the program.
I can hear a difference.
Old 25th August 2007
  #28
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrik View Post
According to that sos interview CLA is still using 16 bits.
Only on DASH. (Sony 3348)

He just prefers the sound of the 16 bit version.
Old 25th August 2007
  #29
Lives for gear
 
jupiter8's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rulesforradicals View Post
True. But the signal is recorded as 64-bits (or 32, 16, whatever) in the program.
I can hear a difference.
Well of course you can hear the difference.The power of the mind is an astonishing thing.It can fool you to do the most silly things if you wish.

Like waisting almost 300% hd space for no benefit whatsoever.
Old 25th August 2007
  #30
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Well of course you can hear the difference.The power of the mind is an astonishing thing.It can fool you to do the most silly things if you wish.

Like waisting almost 300% hd space for no benefit whatsoever.
Blind testing involved with more than one participant. No astonishing silliness involved. And I concur with hard drive space waste, and like I said, 16-bits sounds fine most of the time--depends on what you're working on.

And I haven't done any real work at 64-bits, just a test for my own benefit and knowledge. I like to know these things for myself, not just go by what others say. I prefer to have an informed opinion.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump
Forum Jump