naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 16 bit vs 24 bit Information Theory Hypothesis

Subject: Re: 16 bit vs 24 bit Information Theory Hypothesis
From: "Tim Nielsen" supernielsen
Date: Sat May 26, 2007 6:33 pm ((PDT))
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.








<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