Bit rate?
Home > Home Recording Forum > Recording Techniques > Bit rate?
Posted on Mar 06, 2006 08:35 am
Goldenmean87
Conjurer of Emotion
Member Since: Jan 14, 2006
I was wondering if it is smarter to use 24 bit quality audio when doing all of your mixing and editing as opposed to 16 bit. I am thinking that working with 24 bit may be better for preserving sound quality but I am wondering if there will be an audible difference in the mix from the time of mixing in 24 bit and the time of encoding in 16 bit.
[ Back to Top ]
Mar 06, 2006 08:45 am This gets asked a lot, we have to get an article up about this some day. The standard CD is 16bit by definition, but in actuality is somewhere around 12-13 bit after encoding. That said you hit it right when you mentioned preserving sound quality. The higher resolution you start with the higher you will end with.
During mixing, when you apply effects, automation and other such processed tasks the computer is busy doing all sorts of calculations to process the reverbs, compression, volume changes, panning movements and whatever else you have going on. Many of those processes, when being calculated, have fractions left over, those fractions are, in effect, thrown away, and the spaces left over are filled in with noise. Therefore, though you have a 24-bit file, it's actually a very bastardized 24 bit due to this process. So, the higher the bit rate you start with, the higher the ACTUAL bit rate you wind up with...whether or not it is audible depends on the listener.
The downside of this is that higher bit rate and sample rates use up more space on your hard drive and take more processing power to work with. In addition, it must also be noted that with increased interest in DVD audio and surround sound mixing of music, the "standard recording" will no longer be 16bit/44.1 sample rate, as surround sound standards are 24 bit/96k sample rate, with that standard varying slightly as there are competing standards fighting for dominance at the moment.
Mar 07, 2006 05:34 pm thanks for your input DB but my main question that I needed an answer for was if the change between a relative 24 bit recording to a relative 16 bit mixdown would make an auible difference. I just don't want to mix in 24 bit and hear great quality and then hear a noticible degradation when playing the mix back on a cd.
So is it a difference that you can really notice?
Mar 07, 2006 07:00 pm Like I said, some will, some won't, some claim they will just to sound cool...it depends on how much processing you do, what you use to dither down, etc.
The bottom line is this (for me anyway) I want the highest resolution to archive as possible, should I ever choose to go back and remix or anything...so I record at 24-bit, as do most people these days.
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
Mar 08, 2006 08:16 pm You really wont hear an audible differance in the quality of the sound once its mixxed down. Some people calim they can hear the differance. Really it is as dB stated, keeping a higher resolution audio file for editing purposes. Each time you edit audio digitally there is a fraction of bit decimation going on. If the file is in 24 bit there is less noticable bit decimation. But even at 16 bit, most normal people will never hear the differance at all. On most systems it will never be noticed.
Mar 11, 2006 07:42 pm ok thank you for the explanation
olddogMember
Since: Jul 02, 2003
Mar 12, 2006 02:53 pm The most important thing IMO is to make sure you are working in 32bit FP regardless of the bitrate you record at and to save a 32bit FP copy of your work for later editing should you need to go back and do more on the file. All integer formats including 24 bit suffer from rounding errors, though the higher the bit rate the smaller the error, when applying effects and other processing. Depending on how much processing you do the effect can be very minor or very noticible. Most all DAW software these days support 32 bit Floating Point as well as plugin's, some even support 64bit now.
Dan
