FFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUU- Bit rate problem

xTomx

xTomx

Member
Oct 29, 2009
860
0
16
Milton Keynes
So I spent about 4 hours recording guitar parts the other day, split into DI (to be amp-sim'd later) then one mic on a head going into a 4x12.

Then RIGHT at the end I realized I recorded everything in 16-bit. I was using a crappy DI and pre-amp to begin with, is my material gonna be worth keeping or should I re-do everything in 24 bit?
 
I don't think I've ever done anything in 24 bit. I'm what you would call a "hack." I say keep it!

One time I was just trying out some solos over a tune using a behringer V-tone pedal. Next thing you know I pulled off all these awesome runs, I couldn't even replicate it again if I had to - I just had to keep it. Gotta work with what you have sometimes.
 
It's a melodic hardcore song so there's some cleanish aspects in it, and it's just gonna bug me in general so I guess I'll re-do it,
thanks guys!
 
keep it. as long as your levels aren't fucked it won't matter anyways - as lasse already said, distorted guitars aren't exactly dynamic
 
*Fuck that

It's gonna be a CD release only so it needs to be bounced down to 16-bit anyway, so it saves me having to use dithering.
 
If you didn't notice it when you were tracking, it's not a problem.

Chris Lord-Alge is still working at 16-bit, and he's probably the top mixer in the business (if it makes you feel any better).
 
BLUElightCory said:
Chris Lord-Alge is still working at 16-bit
Click to expand...

Says who? Do you have any proof to back up your statement? When I googled, I read Much of Lord-Alge's gear appears to date from 15 years ago or more, and it's a sign of how fast technology is moving that one feels compelled to explain that the 3348 is a 48-track digital two-inch tape machine that was first introduced in 1989, and Lord-Alge has the original 16-bit/48kHz version. " The Sony PCM-3348 has 2X oversampling in both A/D and D/A, so he most likely works with 32bit.
 
if you are going to be reamping, then this will be a problem. it will introduce a bunch of unwanted noise to your tone. if you are just using amp sims, you might be ok.
 
ahjteam said:
Says who? Do you have any proof to back up your statement? When I googled, I read Much of Lord-Alge's gear appears to date from 15 years ago or more, and it's a sign of how fast technology is moving that one feels compelled to explain that the 3348 is a 48-track digital two-inch tape machine that was first introduced in 1989, and Lord-Alge has the original 16-bit/48kHz version. " The Sony PCM-3348 has 2X oversampling in both A/D and D/A, so he most likely works with 32bit.
Click to expand...

I think you're incorrect bro. PTHD won't even accept 32-bit WAV files. He gets his session files, whether it be a PT session, Tape, whatever, has his assistants combine/stem certain things so he can dump it all onto the Sony's 48 tracks which then feed to his SSL.

I believe that's how he works based on what I've read/seen.
 
ahjteam said:
Says who? Do you have any proof to back up your statement? When I googled, I read Much of Lord-Alge's gear appears to date from 15 years ago or more, and it's a sign of how fast technology is moving that one feels compelled to explain that the 3348 is a 48-track digital two-inch tape machine that was first introduced in 1989, and Lord-Alge has the original 16-bit/48kHz version. " The Sony PCM-3348 has 2X oversampling in both A/D and D/A, so he most likely works with 32bit.
Click to expand...

Wow, dude.

You just posted that "Lord-Alge has the original 16-bit/48kHz version" - Did you need more proof than that?

By the way, oversampling is a process used to aid and improve A/D and D/A conversion, it doesn't actually result in 32-bit audio. It results in 16-bit audio.

You can also find many articles where he states that 16-bit sounds fine as long as you use proper gain-staging. Here's a direct quote:

Until they come out with the ideal medium, I say stick with one that works. People are saying, “Well, it's not 24-bit, it's only 16-bit.” And I say, “If it sounds good, what do you care what the word length is?” Let the bits fall where they may. The system I use works, and it sounds good.

Here's the article if you want to check it out - it's not new (2001) but it confirms the whole 16-bit thing:

http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_chris_lordalge/index1.html

I suppose it's possible in the past year or two he could have switched over to a 24-bit system. But that doesn't negate all of the great recordings that have been tracked or mixed at 16-bit.
 
BLUElightCory said:
By the way, oversampling is a process used to aid and improve A/D and D/A conversion, it doesn't actually result in 32-bit audio. It results in 16-bit audio.
Click to expand...

"In practice, oversampling is implemented in order to achieve cheaper higher-resolution A/D and D/A conversion. For instance, to implement a 24-bit converter, it is sufficient to use a 20-bit converter that can run at 256 times the target sampling rate. Averaging a group of 256 consecutive 20-bit samples adds 4 bits to the resolution of the average, producing a single sample with 24-bit resolution."
 
ahjteam said:
"In practice, oversampling is implemented in order to achieve cheaper higher-resolution A/D and D/A conversion. For instance, to implement a 24-bit converter, it is sufficient to use a 20-bit converter that can run at 256 times the target sampling rate. Averaging a group of 256 consecutive 20-bit samples adds 4 bits to the resolution of the average, producing a single sample with 24-bit resolution."
Click to expand...

Correct, but X2 oversampling in the converter stage does not mean your 16 bit device is in fact running at 32bit. It merely bumps up the sample rate artificially for more accurate conversion. You're still getting 16 bit in the end
 
ahjteam said:
"In practice, oversampling is implemented in order to achieve cheaper higher-resolution A/D and D/A conversion. For instance, to implement a 24-bit converter, it is sufficient to use a 20-bit converter that can run at 256 times the target sampling rate. Averaging a group of 256 consecutive 20-bit samples adds 4 bits to the resolution of the average, producing a single sample with 24-bit resolution."
Click to expand...

I don't understand what point you're trying to make here. This quote just supports what I said about oversampling being used to aid/improve A/D conversion, it doesn't say "2x oversampling a 20-bit file will produce a 40-bit file," which was essentially your argument. Copy-pasting quotes from Wikipedia won't double the resolution of Chris Lord-Alge's tracks.

The quote above is stating that you can use a cheaper, lower resolution converter (20-bit) to produce a 24-bit file. That's fine. It's not actually adding resolution to the original signal, and it won't turn a 16-bit signal into a 32-bit signal. Oversampling means that the converters in the unit are multiplying the sample rate of the incoming signal, which raises the frequencies of any quantization noise caused by the conversion process, which allows the manufacturer to use anti-aliasing filters with a gentler slope, which reduces phase problems and improves conversion quality.

Here's a whitepaper by Dan Lavry about sampling/oversampling, check out page 4.

http://www.lavryengineering.com/white_papers/sample.pdf

Wow, somehow I don't think the is the direction the OP thought this thread would head.

To the O.P. - Do whatever you want. 16 bit is sufficient for achieving professional results, but 24 bit will offer an improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

zackpennington
Which signal chain would yield the best results?
Replies
2
Views
835
F.O.H.
colonel kurtz
C
"Evil" Aidy
Help! Duh! Just realised I've been recording everything at 32-bit float...
Replies
16
Views
1K
F.O.H.
dcb
D
Kellii
Noisy DI Help :(
Replies
3
Views
587
F.O.H.
Kellii
K
T
A question or two on various reamp boxes
Replies
4
Views
1K
F.O.H.
Thared33
T
VikingAxe
DI Guitars
Replies
5
Views
991
F.O.H.
VikingAxe
V
Top Bottom