Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: 24bit ?

Expand Messages
  • Don Cox
    ... Likely true, but if you plan to apply effects, the higher sample rate and depth will both give more accurate calculations. 24/96 would be over the top if
    Message 1 of 13 , Sep 16, 2005
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      On 16/09/05, Bernd Roesch wrote:

      >> So for some people i believe it would be good having 24bit and high
      >> rate. Just curious.
      >
      > most important is high rate for softsynths.a rate >48khz give better
      > sounds.Over 64 khz then there is no better sounds hear in my test

      Likely true, but if you plan to apply effects, the higher sample rate
      and depth will both give more accurate calculations. 24/96 would be over the
      top if you simply recorded some sound and played it back unchanged.

      Effects includes just changing the level of a sound.

      >
      > If more then 16 bit in hd-rec wave's is need,i think not.hd-rec can
      > load 24 bit samples.when you do a mix there are 3 or 4 samples or
      > voices play together.You must reduce the volume of each 16 bit sample
      > or you get clipping.hd-rec use intern 32 bit in near all effects.But
      > ahi use 16 bit so you get the limit and must lower the volume of all
      > waves.so only important is that ahi support 24 bit mode.does ahi
      > support 24 bit ?

      AFAIK it does now, at least in the PPC version.


      > If so you get easy a overall dynamic of 18 bits.I think thats really
      > enough.4* louder than 16 bit.range from total silence upto a starting
      > airplane 110 db.and btw: a human can only hear above 12 db.so range is
      > from 12 to 122 db in praxis
      >
      > Most cards have 24 bit it sound nice in marketing,but not more than 16
      > bit dynamic.Try it out.record silence and look in the wave and zoom so
      > every sample is see.if there is a equal line in 16 bit you can be sure
      > your card really have 16 bit dynamic
      >
      > a sb-live card for example have only 14 bit dynamic.there is much
      > noises see in the last 2 bits

      I don't think anyone would use a card from Creative for serious work.

      However, even if you can only record in 16-bit, it would still be better
      to calculate in 32-bit or even 64-bit.

      To hear exactly what is in your sound files, you would use a good
      external DAC.


      Regards
      --
      Don Cox
      doncox@...
    • Thilo Köhler
      Hello Don ... Critical Effects are done in 32bit floats, the mixer itself can handle 32bit integer, only the storing as files or the AHI output is downsized to
      Message 2 of 13 , Sep 18, 2005
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello Don

        > Likely true, but if you plan to apply effects, the higher sample rate and
        > depth will both give more accurate calculations. 24/96 would be over the
        > top if you simply recorded some sound and played it back unchanged.
        >
        > Effects includes just changing the level of a sound.
        Critical Effects are done in 32bit floats, the mixer itself can handle
        32bit integer, only the storing as files or the AHI output is downsized
        to 16bit. I will probably implement something that file saving can
        benefit from 24bit.
        >>
        >> If more then 16 bit in hd-rec wave's is need,i think not.hd-rec can
        >> load 24 bit samples.when you do a mix there are 3 or 4 samples or
        >> voices play together.You must reduce the volume of each 16 bit sample
        >> or you get clipping.hd-rec use intern 32 bit in near all effects.But
        >> ahi use 16 bit so you get the limit and must lower the volume of all
        >> waves.so only important is that ahi support 24 bit mode.does ahi
        >> support 24 bit ?
        >
        > AFAIK it does now, at least in the PPC version.
        Yes it does, but there are not many drivers out there.
        I think 16bit still does a very good job.

        >> a sb-live card for example have only 14 bit dynamic.there is much
        >> noises see in the last 2 bits
        >
        > I don't think anyone would use a card from Creative for serious work.
        Why not ? My SB Live is much better than my Yamaha Promix Mixers,
        and they where regared as professional exquipment a couple of
        years ago, and in those times people made good music as well ;-)

        > However, even if you can only record in 16-bit, it would still be better
        > to calculate in 32-bit or even 64-bit.
        Yes, HD-Rec records in 16bit, but the mixer is 32bit (however not making
        much
        use of the upper 16bit), but DSP is mostly in 32bit floats.
        64 bit would certainly overkill ;-)
        We dont want to waste CPU power, most Amiga Systems are
        still a bit too slow for hardcorde usage.

        Please not that the bit resolution of audio signal only adds some
        noise. And at 16bit (if you use the dynamic range proper) the noise
        if very very low, much lower than e.g. the noise you get
        recording a guitar or a singer. Taking respekt of the masking effect
        of the human ear, there will be no difference at all during the music,
        only e.g. when a sound fades out. But here we are still very good in 16bit.
        24bit makes only sense on professinal equipment where you hear the
        sound very loud and have a very high dynmaic range, e.g. in Cinemas.

        Greetings,

        Thilo
      • Krister S. Skrtic
        ... I have not the code but there is 68k/warpup version of flac downloadable. It was ages ago i tested it. Here is link to the exe s.
        Message 3 of 13 , Sep 18, 2005
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          > Does anybody have code for flac ?

          I have not the code but there is 68k/warpup version of flac downloadable.
          It was ages ago i tested it. Here is link to the exe's.
          http://amiga.sourceforge.net/

          > The compressing is not so easy.
          > The on-the-fly compression should be
          > - looseless
          > - capable of seeking
          > - fast

          I dont believe its fast (flac)

          > I could use zlib with a filter. But that is slow
          > and not easy to seek.
          >
          > I could use 8bit non-linear dynamic delta coding, would
          > compress 50%, is fast but a bit lossy.

          We dont want lossy :) However i was not thinking about on-the-fly
          just to be able to save it compressed when your finished with the music.

          > I dont know about flac speed.

          You can download the file and check it. I had not used this for ages and
          i have not much experience in it. Just know that it packs lossless and its
          free.

          --
          -----------------------------------------------------
          TRANSPLANT & EMULATE - TRANCE ARTISTS
          http://hem.bredband.net/kriskr
          -----------------------------------------------------
        • Krister S. Skrtic
          ... Thanks for the info
          Message 4 of 13 , Sep 18, 2005
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            > Please not that the bit resolution of audio signal only adds some
            > noise. And at 16bit (if you use the dynamic range proper) the noise
            > if very very low, much lower than e.g. the noise you get
            > recording a guitar or a singer. Taking respekt of the masking effect
            > of the human ear, there will be no difference at all during the music,
            > only e.g. when a sound fades out. But here we are still very good in 16bit.
            > 24bit makes only sense on professinal equipment where you hear the
            > sound very loud and have a very high dynmaic range, e.g. in Cinemas.

            Thanks for the info
          • Don Cox
            ... It would make sense to be able to save in 24-bit in case of wanting to bring a file back in for more processing. ... 24-bit well dithered down to 16 bit is
            Message 5 of 13 , Sep 18, 2005
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              On 18/09/05, Thilo Kohler wrote:

              >> Effects includes just changing the level of a sound.
              > Critical Effects are done in 32bit floats, the mixer itself can handle
              > 32bit integer, only the storing as files or the AHI output is
              > downsized to 16bit. I will probably implement something that file
              > saving can benefit from 24bit.

              It would make sense to be able to save in 24-bit in case of wanting to
              bring a file back in for more processing.


              >> AFAIK it does now, at least in the PPC version.
              > Yes it does, but there are not many drivers out there.
              > I think 16bit still does a very good job.

              24-bit well dithered down to 16 bit is good for listening. The point is,
              if possible, to use 24/96 for recording and processing, then reduce at
              the end. Or one day, burn to SACD.


              > Please not that the bit resolution of audio signal only adds some
              > noise.

              Not so. It makes the steps finer and gives headroom for calculation.

              Trying to set the best recording level for a 16-bit sound card is almost
              impossible.

              > And at 16bit (if you use the dynamic range proper) the noise if
              > very very low, much lower than e.g. the noise you get recording a
              > guitar or a singer. Taking respekt of the masking effect of the human
              > ear, there will be no difference at all during the music, only e.g.
              > when a sound fades out. But here we are still very good in 16bit.
              > 24bit makes only sense on professinal equipment where you hear the
              > sound very loud and have a very high dynmaic range, e.g. in Cinemas.

              The important part is the very low levels, where the reverb is. This is
              what gives a sense of space and the distance of the instrument.

              Regards
              --
              Don Cox
              doncox@...
            • "Thilo Köhler"
              ... I agree. ... Yes, but therefore we have 32bit in HD-Rec mixer. ... Yes, but 13-15 bit is still ok for analog instruments and vocals. The noise from your
              Message 6 of 13 , Sep 20, 2005
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                > >> Effects includes just changing the level of a sound.
                > > Critical Effects are done in 32bit floats, the mixer itself can handle
                > > 32bit integer, only the storing as files or the AHI output is
                > > downsized to 16bit. I will probably implement something that file
                > > saving can benefit from 24bit.
                >
                > It would make sense to be able to save in 24-bit in case of wanting to
                > bring a file back in for more processing.
                I agree.

                > > Please not that the bit resolution of audio signal only adds some
                > > noise.
                >
                > Not so. It makes the steps finer and gives headroom for calculation.
                Yes, but therefore we have 32bit in HD-Rec mixer.

                > Trying to set the best recording level for a 16-bit sound card is almost
                > impossible.
                Yes, but 13-15 bit is still ok for analog instruments and vocals.
                The noise from your equipment will be already much higher.

                > The important part is the very low levels, where the reverb is. This is
                > what gives a sense of space and the distance of the instrument.
                As I said, the 16bit quantisation only adds noise, nothing else.
                It does not change the impression of depth, stereo, brilliance etc.
                During the song you wont hear anything of this noise, because of the
                masking effect of other frequencies, the only opportunity you
                have to hear this is at the end of the song when the reverb is
                fading out. But you have to really boost up your speakers to hear
                even theoretically a quantisation noise, and there my ampfifier adds
                already such a lot of noise that the quantisation noise is really not
                important.

                Of course I agree that 24bit is better, and that DSP operations should
                not be done in 16bit, but the recording of instruments and saving the
                master digitally in 16bit does really a good job, much better than it
                was possible some years ago with analog equipment. So in 99.9% of the
                cases 16bit should be ok. This is why I will focus on other features
                more than the 24bit support, plus I dont have a 24bit card + AHI driver.
                Your song will probably sound much better if I invest 10h in a better reverb
                algorithm than investing the same time in 24bit support.

                Greetings,

                Thilo

                --
                GMX DSL = Maximale Leistung zum minimalen Preis!
                2000 MB nur 2,99, Flatrate ab 4,99 Euro/Monat: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
              • Don Cox
                ... And at the end of almost every note in a recording of a solo piano. ... I doubt whether 16-bit is as good as reel-to-reel tape. Most engineers seem to
                Message 7 of 13 , Sep 20, 2005
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 20/09/05, Thilo Kohler wrote:

                  >> The important part is the very low levels, where the reverb is. This
                  >> is what gives a sense of space and the distance of the instrument.
                  > As I said, the 16bit quantisation only adds noise, nothing else.
                  > It does not change the impression of depth, stereo, brilliance etc.
                  > During the song you wont hear anything of this noise, because of the
                  > masking effect of other frequencies, the only opportunity you
                  > have to hear this is at the end of the song when the reverb is
                  > fading out.

                  And at the end of almost every note in a recording of a solo piano.


                  > But you have to really boost up your speakers to hear
                  > even theoretically a quantisation noise, and there my ampfifier adds
                  > already such a lot of noise that the quantisation noise is really not
                  > important.
                  >
                  > Of course I agree that 24bit is better, and that DSP operations should
                  > not be done in 16bit, but the recording of instruments and saving the
                  > master digitally in 16bit does really a good job, much better than it
                  > was possible some years ago with analog equipment.

                  I doubt whether 16-bit is as good as reel-to-reel tape. Most engineers
                  seem to think that analog quality sound was finally reached when 24/96
                  came into use.

                  > So in 99.9% of the
                  > cases 16bit should be ok. This is why I will focus on other features
                  > more than the 24bit support, plus I dont have a 24bit card + AHI
                  > driver. Your song will probably sound much better if I invest 10h in a
                  > better reverb algorithm than investing the same time in 24bit support.

                  That is so.

                  I just think that 24/96 has become the standard, so Amiga users should
                  keep up.

                  Regards
                  --
                  Don Cox
                  doncox@...
                • Bernd Roesch
                  Hello Don ... BTW: listen over 80 db volume is bad for ears.more than 2-3 hours you get irreparable damage in high freq listen of your ears.there are lots of
                  Message 8 of 13 , Sep 20, 2005
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello Don

                    On 20.09.05, you wrote:

                    > On 20/09/05, Thilo Kohler wrote:
                    >
                    >>> The important part is the very low levels, where the reverb is. This
                    >>> is what gives a sense of space and the distance of the instrument.
                    >> As I said, the 16bit quantisation only adds noise, nothing else.
                    >> It does not change the impression of depth, stereo, brilliance etc.
                    >> During the song you wont hear anything of this noise, because of the
                    >> masking effect of other frequencies, the only opportunity you
                    >> have to hear this is at the end of the song when the reverb is
                    >> fading out.
                    >
                    > And at the end of almost every note in a recording of a solo piano.

                    BTW: listen over 80 db volume is bad for ears.more than 2-3 hours you get
                    irreparable damage in high freq listen of your ears.there are lots of
                    musican with over 40 that hear very bad.ANd of course mayn disco kids

                    also keep in mind,ear hear only above 13 db.If you hear noise of real 16 bit
                    dynamic thats more than 100 db.

                    I think if 24bit 96 khz get standard musicans and disco Kids hear than
                    earlier bad.

                    also keep in mind noone have a computer that is 100% silence.so your noies
                    level is more.I have done much work to get a very silence computer.It have
                    a noise of 22db.I have a measure intrument buy from conrad electronic,that
                    can measure digital light noise temperature volt etc.

                    But a thing is usefull.record in 24 bit.when hd-rec import a 24 bit wave
                    this wave is scale to full 16 bit.so you have it more easy to mix


                    Regards
                  • Richard Mattsson
                    ... Hi Don, I stumbled on an interesting thread on rec.audio.pro a while back which discussed this question, although it primarily centered on sampling
                    Message 9 of 13 , Sep 20, 2005
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On 20-Sep-05, Don Cox wrote:

                      > I doubt whether 16-bit is as good as reel-to-reel tape. Most engineers
                      > seem to think that analog quality sound was finally reached when 24/96
                      > came into use.

                      Hi Don,

                      I stumbled on an interesting thread on rec.audio.pro a while back which
                      discussed this question, although it primarily centered on sampling
                      frequency rather than sample depth. Some of the comments mention the
                      basic issue of the noise floor of other elements in the recording chain.
                      I was always skeptical that 16/44 was sufficient to capture the nuance
                      and warmth of acoustic instruments on CD, but I think that the quality
                      of ADC and DAC often has a greater effect on the sound than boosting the
                      rate or increasing sample depth.

                      Regarding ADC and DAC quality, I didn't see a response to Thilo about
                      why the Creative sound cards might not be used in 'serious'
                      applications. (Saying 'professional' rather than 'serious' might be more
                      easily defensible.) I don't have any firm information, but I'm guessing
                      the quality of the converters used in Creative products is not deemed to
                      be especially high. I know the AD516 converters were considered to be
                      quite good, but I don't know how they compare with consumer-grade
                      converters manufactured today. I'm reluctant to give up my AD516 or DR16
                      in order to easily record through the SBLive, although I've been doing
                      that recently. I should try some tests, but it's difficult to do
                      properly. I have been fairly sure I've detected degraded sound quality
                      when listening to CDs through the SBLive compared to a standard
                      consumer-grade CD player, but that was entirely subjective and not a
                      blind test.

                      Anyway, here's some quotes from the thread I mentioned. Most of these
                      guys are well-regarded frequent contributors.

                      ------------------------------------------------------------
                      http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/4dc4813256ed928d?hl=en&

                      Don Pearce:

                      Clearly being a simple programmer isn't sufficient. Moving from 16 to
                      24 bits improves matters if - and only if - the noise floor of the
                      original analogue signal is below that of the 16 bit dither signal.
                      The chances of that happening in any real recording are vanishingly
                      close to zero. In virtually any scenario encountered in real life, 16
                      bits record just as high a quality as 24. There may well be special
                      demo recordings that don't obey this rule of thumb.
                      ------------------------------------------------------------

                      ------------------------------------------------------------
                      http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/20da55da4b76eb14?hl=en&

                      Scott Dorsey:

                      > The more bits we can use to re-create the analog wavesform, the better
                      > the sound.

                      Not necessarily, no.  I can find all kinds of ways to waste data.

                      > So, in a nutshell. Moving from 16 bit to 24 bit, we have 8 extra
                      > bits per sample to represent the analog wave which is a massive gain.

                      Not really.  It gives you more dynamic range, which is often wasted
                      anyway.  96 dB is an awful lot.
                      ------------------------------------------------------------

                      ------------------------------------------------------------
                      http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/98b5b201b7ec13b5?hl=en&

                      Arny Krueger:

                      > So, in a nutshell. Moving from 16 bit to 24 bit, we have 8 extra
                      > bits per sample to represent the analog wave which is a massive gain.

                      The benefit is a reduced noise floor, or if you will higher resolution.
                      However at some point the digital noise floor moves under the analog
                      noise floor and further improvements are moot.
                      ------------------------------------------------------------

                      A link to the whole thread (partway through):
                      http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/browse_thread/thread/77aba2031e3f72c6/20da55da4b76eb14?hl=en#20da55da4b76eb14


                      --
                      Richard Mattsson - http://home.bluemarble.net/~mattsson/
                      Audio Video Art -- http://www.audiovideoart.com
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.