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
ITT: Audio Myths (post it, if its made you step back and say wtf) LETS SAVE THE KIDS! Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 7th September 2011
  #61
Lives for gear
 

Here's a related one ...

"Recording at 24-bit actually offers 144dB of SNR"
Old 7th September 2011
  #62
Lives for gear
 
filipv's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 007 View Post
Recording at 24 bit does sound better.
This is a myth to you?
yeah

they both sound great, everything else being the same
Old 7th September 2011
  #63
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by filipv View Post
24 bit sounding better than 16 bit
It does sound better if you're recording with headroom. AES -18dB(FS) at 16bit gives you 8 bit recordings in quiet passages!!
Old 7th September 2011
  #64
Lives for gear
 
filipv's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
It does sound better if you're recording with headroom. AES -18dB(FS) at 16bit gives you 8 bit recordings in quiet passages!!
a simple comparison of a quiet 16 bit recording vs normal 8 bit recording will prove this wrong. try it in any audio-editor.
Old 7th September 2011
  #65
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 007
Recording at 24 bit does sound better.
This is a myth to you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by filipv View Post
yeah

they both sound great, everything else being the same
I knew this thread was a mistake
Old 7th September 2011
  #66
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldeanalogueguy View Post
objectively i am right
subjectively you are fooling yourself
it sounds better only because you bought it
and you know you are using it

let me give you a pop quiz triple blind test
and you wont pick it out of the others reliably
I'm really aware of the placebo effect and I fully expected the Canare (which is HIGHLY respected here and on TGP to be the best). Couldn't understand where my high end went (same thing with the Quantum Oxygen Free although I confess I got that cheap in a box of decent cables). It wasn't until I did the direct comparison that I found the difference. And it was obvious. Again, NOT a problem after a buffer, but guitar to bypassed pedal to Canare interconnect, you'd have to be deaf to miss the difference. If you're using these in studio applications the problem goes away because you don't have the resonant low pass filter effect. And if your pickups are active it won't be a problem because that's a buffered signal. Instead of religiously telling me I'm wrong, try it out: strat, cable, amp-done! If you can't hear any difference between Canare and Hosa, so be it.

On another note with reference to buffers and cables: the Tech 21 guys tell me that they don't put XLR outputs on their "character" pedals because a buffered driver isn't affected by even 50' of 1/4" cable. I had to try this one out because I didn't believe it! I used my looper with 20' of generic guitar cable in each loop (plus 20' before and after for a total of 120' of 1/4" cable). I used a Zvex SHO (which has dual outputs) and ran one side into the 120' then to my Yamaha AW4416 line in. The other side went to a direct box, thru 6' of XLR cable and into the AW4416 mic pre (they're pretty clean and flat). I matched levels, didn't try to null them, but I could NOT hear a difference between the two sides. I would have bet money before the test that a direct box would give a clearer, brighter signal and I would have been wrong!

So, "you need a direct box for a run of more than 20'" is also a myth!
Old 7th September 2011
  #67
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post
Correct, only analog tape can do that.
Shhh! No telling!

Cheers,

Otto
Old 7th September 2011
  #68
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
sure - but that is distinct to saying certain pieces of hardware are top class and the best in the world. It's always precluded with "in the right hands". World class mixes are, of course, possible ITB. My stuff may not be the best in the world but I've mixed some of the biggest products in the world ITB!! BUT - my best sounding stuff (some of the jazz records I've done) are console and outboard based!

It's weird though - better gear CAN enable a better record. And pound for pound - the great recordings in the world have been done on the high end gear. It just depends what you're after. I've oodles of high end outboard - but most of my work is ITB....

The myth is : better gear will make a better record. The truth is - better gear enables higher goals... but you'd better be good too!! Like excellent running shoes enable the best to run better ... or better engines enable the best race car drivers to reach their potential.

Because I'll tell you what is NOT true - ITB can match tastefully and expertly used hardware. Note that this is not the same as "you can't make a great record ITB" - because you can!!

Sage words Narco - like UBK I always find your posts on the money.

Oh I have one possibly - its not a myth perse but the last thing most people tend to focus on is acoustic treatment - THAT amazes me.
Old 7th September 2011
  #69
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by filipv View Post
a simple comparison of a quiet 16 bit recording vs normal 8 bit recording will prove this wrong. try it in any audio-editor.
heh

A 16bit recording peaking at -6 ( actually it'd be 6.02 ish) is a 15 bit recording, you are only using the lower 15 bits. The bit for 32768 will never be toggled on. The piano (the power not the instrument) passages with forte sitting at -18 will be sat somewhere around -48.... 8 bit!

The point of 24 bit is to allow that kind of headroom so even the quietest passages are still well abOve the quantisation noise. Works!
Old 7th September 2011
  #70
Lives for gear
 
filipv's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
heh

A 16bit recording peaking at -6 ( actually it'd be 6.02 ish) is a 15 bit recording, you are only using the lower 15 bits. The bit for 32768 will never be toggled on. The piano (the power not the instrument) passages with forte sitting at -18 will be sat somewhere around -48.... 8 bit!
soooo 16 bit recording peaking at -48 should sound the same as 8 bit recording peaking at 0?

Have you ever tried it? I have!
Old 7th September 2011
  #71
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

An 8 bit recording dithered from a 16 bit recording won't, no. But indeed a 16 bit recording peaking at -48 would indeed be the same as a zero peaking 8 bit recording. Think about it ( I'm not trying to be a dick ! Promise!! )
Old 7th September 2011
  #72
Lives for gear
 
Suda Badri's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
I knew this thread was a mistake
HEY GUYS! Whats going on in this thread!


But by all means keep going, you just have to learn what you are most comfortable believing given the information you have!
Old 7th September 2011
  #73
Lives for gear
 
Suda Badri's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
Those are two different things. Yes, loud signals contain soft portions within the same waveform, so that busts a different myth. Digital gain changes do affect the waveform, but the added noise and distortion is so minimal that nobody could possibly hear it. My article in the current issue of GC Pro's Audio Solutions magazine proves that artifacts added by gain changes in modern digital software are typically 120 dB below the music, so nobody could possibly hear it. Further, my test did 30 cumulative gain changes in a row, not just one.

--Ethan
Thanks for the info!
Old 8th September 2011
  #74
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doubledecker View Post
1. Waves E channel and real SSL E channel sound exactly the same
2.If you buy Tony Maserati and CLA Waves signature plugins you gonna get get THAT sound
3.If you graduate from some school for engineers you have better prospect of finding a real job in a real studio
4.Summing is really important
5.Macs are much better than PC for audio
6.ITB mixes sound one-dimensional and don't sound as good as OTB because of bad gain staging ITB
7.Quality of my mixes vastly improved since i turned down faders and put trim plugin on every channel
8.Native PT and TDM PT are the same thing only TDM costs more
9.Digital EQ plugins all sound very different from manufacturer to manufacturer
10.I don't choose plugins based on the way they look
11.You can get same results ITB like OTB, you just need to learn how
12.It's always better to cut with EQ instead of boost

heh

Great stuff
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