MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

What bitrate do you record at?
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Production Techniques Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Author What bitrate do you record at?
msmithsp
Curious to know the encoding and file parameters you guys use since a lot of modular is analogue and skies the limit for sound quality.

Typically I record with a Behringer audio interface @16-bit, 48khz and I know there are devices that can go way higher. Since I'm gearing up for modular recordings, I'm interested in what you do and what's appropriate for modular. On the other hand, part of me wants to get a cassette recorder and not involve bitrates at all. Any input (pun intended) or advice is appreciated.
electrik noize
88.2k sample rate and 24 bit for me. Haven't felt the need to go higher
waveglider
Same for me. I record all my modular work on a SD 702 recorder at 88.2/24bit and it is the closest to recording to 2 track open reel for me.
memes_33
44.1k/24 bit or 48k/24 bit for me
iJean
44.1kHz music for CD (CD standard)
48kHz music for video (TV/video standard)
thevegasnerve
mainly use 24/48k, but when I accidently used 16 bit, I couldnt tell the difference. My Zoom R8 wont go any higher as a standalone unit. But the quality is pretty good when I get the levels right.

I would probably shoot for 24/96k if I was still using the computer though. I may try some that way to see if I can hear any improvement.
msmithsp
Okay, thanks. I think I'm getting a feel for the standard. You guys are great as always.
LoFi Junglist
They're all wrong, record at 7 & 1/2 Inches per second (hides)
smithknows
Bit depth is all about headroom. You want more headroom.
http://tweakheadz.com/16-bit-vs-24-bit-audio/
iJean
smithknows wrote:
http://tweakheadz.com/16-bit-vs-24-bit-audio/


Usefull!
Thanks for posting! thumbs up
msmithsp
So informative. And now I know what bitrate really means.
a100user
48/24 has always been sufficient for my needs.
Klangzaun
48K/24b is the one for me. I bounce the tracks in 44K/16b.
tuj
I used to be all about 44.1/16 but recently I have went 96/24 and feel like the difference is there. Bit depth matters more than sample rate IMHO, so if you have to sacrifice one, go with sample rate.
PhineasFreak
interface goes to 192k - i never used higher than 96, usually 48 tho...
Hainbach
48/32
felixer
for years i was happy at 16/48 but a few years back (while getting a new computer) i went to 24/44,1. it just makes recording easier as there is more headroom, so you don't have to push that hard ... obviously it takes more processing, but any decent/recent machine should be able to do that.
WaveRider
recording in 24 bits is an absolute must

44.1/48kHz is fine on good quality converters

I used 88.2 for some tracks, it does sound a bit more punchy, but considering I mainly improvise numerous takes on the modular I went back to 44.1 for storage space savings. I use an old windows XP computer with 16 in -16 outs audio interface, 88.2 takes me back to 12 tracks (8 + 4 from ADAT in) and I often needs 16 tracks in, because I use hardware and record in 1 go.

But with a newer computer with bigger drives, and a new (costly) audio interface I would always record 88.1/96kHz.....

considering the costs involved in getting 16in in 96k, 44.1 is not a big trade-off.
noisejockey
24b/96k, because I can never know when I may want to sample myself and do extreme processing and pitch shifting. I record the extra bits for processing latitude just in case, not because I hear any difference myself between 48kHz and 96Hz.
Michael O.
noisejockey wrote:
24b/96k, because I can never know when I may want to sample myself and do extreme processing and pitch shifting. I record the extra bits for processing latitude just in case, not because I hear any difference myself between 48kHz and 96Hz.


This is basically the camp I'm in- all digital tracking here is 24bit/96kHz. Subjectively, I do love the sound, plus you'd be surprised how many commercial mixes get pitch shifted or time stretched...
thevegasnerve
noisejockey wrote:
24b/96k, because I can never know when I may want to sample myself and do extreme processing and pitch shifting. I record the extra bits for processing latitude just in case, not because I hear any difference myself between 48kHz and 96Hz.


this makes a lot of sense and a good reason to consider 96kHz if you can.
hsosdrum
24-bit/96kHz, always. Computer storage space is damn near free these days (1TB external drives are down around $50), so it just doesn't make sense to be miserly and record at lower bit depths or sampling rates.

The comparisons I've done by ripping 24/96 files down to 16/44, 16/88 and 24/88 show that (to my ears, at least) there is no audible difference whatsoever between a 44.1kHz sampling rate and 88.2kHz or 96kHz.

However, increasing the bit depth from 16 to 24 yields a noticeably more "real" sound on recordings of acoustic instruments (which have an original sound to compare with). I believe this is because the increased resolution (from 96dB dynamic range to 144dB dynamic range) better preserves microscopic details in room ambience, reverb tails and extremely quiet dynamic contrasts that help fool the hearing mechanism into believing that it's experiencing a live acoustic event as opposed to hearing a recording of one being reproduced. The less of this information the brain has to fill in on its own, the more we believe that what we're hearing is real.
Shledge
48khz/24bit. I've never seen the need to go higher.

As for bit depth - you're not going to notice between 16/24bit, as the only major advantage here is headroom. I'm also the complete opposite with sample rates; I can clearly tell the difference between 44.1khz and higher samplerates.
dogoftears
there is no such thing as "bitrate" in regards to audio recording
there is only bit-depth, and sample-rate.

bit depth refers to the dynamic range (amount of volume) available in a recording. each bit is 6 dB. therefore 16 bit is 96 dB of headroom, 24 bit is 144 dB. a 24 bit recording environment allows you to construct a mix with headroom.

sample rate refers to the frequency range, which is half of the given sampling rate. so if recording in 44,100 samples per second, the resulting frequency range is up to 22,050 hz. there are some technical reasons to use high sample rates like 96k, especially if you work with a lot of pitch shifting or plug ins, but that does not mean it is better, in fact the effects of the necessary downsampling that will occur later when using a high SR can often negate the supposed gains in fidelity it brings to the table (just go A/B some different SRC's-- they all sound different, and it even changes the peak levels of the converted material).

record in 24 bit. and do actual a/b comparisons of 44.1 vs higher sample rates and make your own informed decision about which you'd like to use. i prefer 24/44 for various reasons.
felixer
as regards the difference in sound between different bitdepth and samplerates: imho it really depends on the quality of the a/d and d/a converters. i remember when a friend got the first dat-recorder that could do 96kHz and we did lots of tests to see if we could hear a difference with 44,1/48. turned out this mew machine sounded better with those lower rates then the old machine too Mr. Green i was just a better recorder/playbacker overall. so i can imagine 16/44,1 to sound better then 24/96 in some cases.
eg i never liked the sound of protools. but i came around when they started with 24/96. not because of the specs but because they went to a different make converters (and maybe better electronics overall).
so don't be hung up on specs!
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Production Techniques Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group