naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

9. Re: 24 bit vs. 16 bit

Subject: 9. Re: 24 bit vs. 16 bit
From: "Rob Danielson" danielson_rob
Date: Tue May 15, 2007 5:59 pm ((PDT))
At 5:14 PM +0000 5/15/07, John Hartog wrote:
>My earlier statement, "whenever you can, record in the highest bit
>depth your equipment is capable of" is too general. That would only
>make sense if the components of the recorder are fine enough to not
>induce noise to the point it negates benefits of the higher bit depth.
>Still if you are unsure, it is best to err on the side of highest
>potential quality.
>
>We can assume by the Sound Devices example, at least with their
>recorders 24 bit rather than 16 could make a significant difference.
>Still we haven't heard any field examples of this - or have we?

Hi John--
The associated increase in quantizing noise should be fairly
independent of subject matter but, you are right, best to check if
other factors are figuring in. I don't have matching files generated
at both bit rates. Maximum peaks for background ambience should be in
the -40dB range when the mic pre cranked to max or near max. I'll try
to generate some files on my 744T later this month.  Rob D.


--




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • 9. Re: 24 bit vs. 16 bit, Rob Danielson <=
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