At 11:33 AM -0500 7/30/07, Bruce wrote:
>I am not sure what started this "hostility" towards gear and 24-bit
>recording.
Hi Bruce--
Patience was tried but it wasn't as much hostility as expectations
for useful evidence and examples after claims were made.
>You could record at low gains all the time in
>16-bit and wonder later why the recordings come out laced with noise.
Even at low record level settings, the noise should stem from your
mics and pre (more likely the self-noise from your mics with your new
pre). From math reasoning and field examples, if one records 16 bit
background levels to obtain at least -55dBFS, that should provide a
full 55dB of dynamic range for close, loud sounds with no
quantization noise introduced. I'm wondering what other sources of
noise there might be,..
Some recordists have the option of 24 bit recording and accommodating
a large dynamic range in the field with that setting is easier. That
said, there is also a very good chance that the same "large dynamic
range" is fully recordable with 16 bits. The ability to capture peaks
55dB above background levels would seem to be quite suitable for most
natural locations. Rob D.
>Other times, one can make good guesses, and I guess good most of the
>time, but I
>would rather have the power of electronics perform it's advantages, when it
>can, to record more quantity of quality files. That way I can concentrate on
>better things like finding a better position, getting closer to subjects, to
>further push the limits of equipment, then later in the studio figure out
>which files sound the best. Good equipment can make a significant
>difference. I have always pushed the limits of whatever I was using. For
>many years I used Sennheiser elements inside custom PZM reflectors,
>connected to my own preamps and used mini-disc recorders. I was able to get
>some great files with those set ups, but now find that since I have a fancy,
>dancy new fangled preamp and recorder that I could have been getting better
>results much more easily. Technology, when properly applied, has always been
>beneficial and can make a beginner better than someone not making use of it.
>The whole argument of 24-bit recording will be lost in a couple of years as
>no new equipment will record anything else but 24-bit on flash discs, and no
>new mini-disc recorders will ever be made. Not to say all of those recorders
>will actually obtain 24-bit performance though. I can only say embrace the
>advantages and use them to record more quantity of quality. I am very happy
>with my 24-bit recorder, with my rather modestly priced Rode NT1-A's, and
>just grinning over my new preamp. I am now making much better recordings for
>my customers to enjoy, and I am already getting feedback that they really do
>notice a definite increase in quality even though my work was very good in
>the past. If my customers enjoy it better, then it must all be worthwhile.
>
>My three cents, this time ;-)
>
>Bruce Rutkoski
>www.natureguystudio.com
>
--
Rob Danielson
Peck School of the Arts
Department of Film
University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee
|