naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

2. Re: file types Hi HZ subjects?

Subject: 2. Re: file types Hi HZ subjects?
From: "Rob Danielson" danielson_audio
Date: Fri May 15, 2009 1:35 pm ((PDT))
At 9:06 AM -0700 5/15/09, Scott Fraser wrote:
><<Hi Scott-
>I used to record everything at 24bit/48Hz because it made me feel
>more on top of my practice, but money, time, materials, and
>CPU-demand are all significant reasons to record to 16 bits.>>
>
>At current media prices & with current CPU capabilities, these really
>are not impediments anymore.

Hi Scott--
Seems like our priorities or volume needs may differ. I "archive" my 
media to DVD-R's and while the cost per disk is not expensive, I use 
a lot of them. 24 bit files do require 50% more storage materials and 
the data takes 50% more time to prepare and burn. HD storage costs 
less than years ago, but field-generated GB's add-up very quickly for 
me.  I can insert the plugs I need with 6- 16bit files playing on my 
five year old mac but with 24bit files I have to make processing 
compromises.

>
><< The
>additional 5? bits are useful at the stock races and when a
>thunderstorm rolls up, but in the natural spaces I record in, its
>very rare for anything to top 80 dB. I feel there's little purpose in
>making standard practice out of any option that rarely provides
>advantage. I'm with you on mastering to 24 bit files, though. Rob D.>>
>
>Where the extra bits make sense is not in pushing the envelope of
>overall dynamic range (since no microphones have even 16bit signal to
>noise capabilities, much less 24bits worth,) is in DSP, where any
>process, even minor level changes, & certainly any equalization, adds
>rounding errors to the least significant bit in the word. You want
>those errors to exist at the lowest possible quantization level, even
>when the least significant bit contains no actual useful audio. When I
>receive 16bit files for CD mastering I always store them as 24bit
>files so that any EQ, dynamic processing & fades I do induce rounding
>errors at a level below the clients' original dynamic range.

I can't hear a difference between 24 bit masters made the way you 
describe when I start with a 16 bit field recording and 24 bit field 
recording.  I tested it a few times with low saturation material 
thinking it _should_ be audible. Rob D.

>
>Scott Fraser
>
>


-- 







<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