naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 24 bit vs. 16 bit

Subject: Re: 24 bit vs. 16 bit
From: "Marc Myers" buffymarmoset
Date: Mon May 14, 2007 3:58 pm ((PDT))
I drove over an old piece of plywood out in the field a couple of years ago=
. Turned out the bees had made their hive under it. I don't know if the ent=
ire field was suddenly filled with bees but the area around the tractor cer=
tainly was all the way back to the barn in sixth gear at full throttle.

Anyway, a good approximation is DR (dynamic range) as (DR-1.75)/6.03=3Dbits=
.  With 110dB unweighted dynamic range you would get (110-1.75)/6.03=3D17.9=
5 or 18 bits of real data. Sound Devices may be doing a little better than =
that. Most microphones do not. The ME66, for examples has a dBMS of about 8=
4, in other words about 16 bits. You can oversample all you want but there =
will still only be 16 bits of data. It is correct that one gets the best dy=
namic range if you record as close to 0 dB as you can but unless there's pr=
ecious little peaking it's more typical to record at -10 or so to be safe. =
I often record two tracks, one about 7 dB hotter than the other. That way I=
 still have sound if I'm clipping on the hotter channel.




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU