Re: 16 bit vs 24 bit Information Theory Hypothesis

["Tim Nielsen" supernielsen]

Except! When you convert you sample from 16 bit to 24 bit for
processing, the upconversion must 'make up' the missing information.
How would you argue that it wouldn't just be better to record those
24 bits and save the conversion? If you're going to process in 24,
you would probably be smart to just record that way if you have the
ability


On May 26, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Walter Knapp wrote:

> I think this is part of the confusion. The question that's been
> rattling
> along is if it's better the original field recorder records in 24 bit.
> It's a separate question what bit depth your sound editor uses as it
> does not have to use the same as your recorder. You cannot use what
> happens in computer sound editing as a argument for a 24 bit field
> recorder, in other words. The recorder's ability ends with the raw
> audio
> file it produces out in the field.