16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
- Thread starter StratTom
- Start date
Wattage
High Voltologist
Re: 16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
YOu need to know if your system will handle 24-bit audio otherwise you might waste your money buying clips you can't play back.
24-bit audio is a higher quality than 16-bit, think CD quality to DVD quality. There is more digital information to it.
YOu need to know if your system will handle 24-bit audio otherwise you might waste your money buying clips you can't play back.
24-bit audio is a higher quality than 16-bit, think CD quality to DVD quality. There is more digital information to it.
StratTom
New member
Re: 16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
Thanks Wattage! When you say "system", you mean my PC right? I was able to download samples of both the 16 and 24 bit loops, so hopefully I'm ok. I'll have to look at this more when I get home.
Thanks Wattage! When you say "system", you mean my PC right? I was able to download samples of both the 16 and 24 bit loops, so hopefully I'm ok. I'll have to look at this more when I get home.
vinterland
New member
Re: 16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
24 bit has a larger dynamic range than a 16 bit recording system.
24 bit has a larger dynamic range than a 16 bit recording system.
ratherdashing
Kablamminator
Re: 16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
Correct, and we should also point out that it's a MASSIVE increase in range. 16 bits has 65,536 possible dynamic points, versus over 16 million for 24 bits.
To the ear, this translates into more detailed and complex-sounding audio. It also allows for a lot more precision and accuracy when you start introducing digital effects and processing to the signal.
Wattage makes a good point as well: your bit range is only as good as your weakest component. If either your software or your audio hardware can't handle 24 bits, it won't matter. It is entirely possible you won't even be able to play the 24 bit samples in your 16 bit software. Best case scenario is that the program or the hardware will "dither down" the audio to 16 bit.
Correct, and we should also point out that it's a MASSIVE increase in range. 16 bits has 65,536 possible dynamic points, versus over 16 million for 24 bits.
To the ear, this translates into more detailed and complex-sounding audio. It also allows for a lot more precision and accuracy when you start introducing digital effects and processing to the signal.
Wattage makes a good point as well: your bit range is only as good as your weakest component. If either your software or your audio hardware can't handle 24 bits, it won't matter. It is entirely possible you won't even be able to play the 24 bit samples in your 16 bit software. Best case scenario is that the program or the hardware will "dither down" the audio to 16 bit.
jerryjg
PinkElephantologist
Re: 16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
QUOTE_ " Wattage makes a good point as well: your bit range is only as good as your weakest component. If either your software or your audio hardware can't handle 24 bits, it won't matter. It is entirely possible you won't even be able to play the 24 bit samples in your 16 bit software. Best case scenario is that the program or the hardware will "dither down" the audio to 16 bit". ------- I disagree. I had to wonder about this myself for a long time, and finally I found out. 24 bit sounds better , period. Its just does, no matter what your playing it back on; even 16 bit equpiment.
QUOTE_ " Wattage makes a good point as well: your bit range is only as good as your weakest component. If either your software or your audio hardware can't handle 24 bits, it won't matter. It is entirely possible you won't even be able to play the 24 bit samples in your 16 bit software. Best case scenario is that the program or the hardware will "dither down" the audio to 16 bit". ------- I disagree. I had to wonder about this myself for a long time, and finally I found out. 24 bit sounds better , period. Its just does, no matter what your playing it back on; even 16 bit equpiment.
Last edited:
StratTom
New member
Re: 16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
Thanks guys for all your help!
Ratherdashing, thanks for this info! I think I will go for the 24 bit loops. I didn't realize when I posted this at first but I'm actually using 24 bit with my Toneport.
Thanks guys for all your help!
Ratherdashing, thanks for this info! I think I will go for the 24 bit loops. I didn't realize when I posted this at first but I'm actually using 24 bit with my Toneport.
Binnerscot
Well-known member
Re: 16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
I have noticed a better overall quality using 24 bit (even when dithered to 16 bit). I have a Roland Vs-2400 and its native 16 bit has a proprietary compression that sounds pretty, even along side 24 bit (which the machine is also fully capable of)
I have noticed a better overall quality using 24 bit (even when dithered to 16 bit). I have a Roland Vs-2400 and its native 16 bit has a proprietary compression that sounds pretty, even along side 24 bit (which the machine is also fully capable of)
ratherdashing
Kablamminator
Re: 16 bit vs. 24 bit recording
Through a 16 bit system, a 16 bit sound sample will be identical to the same sample in 24 bits. There is no arguing that - the actual binary data will be identical. If you are hearing a difference, it's in your head. Either that or you have a 24 bit system and you don't realize it.
I suppose it's possible that one component can do better dithering than another, which could account for a perceived difference in quality, but that is extremely unlikely.
Through a 16 bit system, a 16 bit sound sample will be identical to the same sample in 24 bits. There is no arguing that - the actual binary data will be identical. If you are hearing a difference, it's in your head. Either that or you have a 24 bit system and you don't realize it.
I suppose it's possible that one component can do better dithering than another, which could account for a perceived difference in quality, but that is extremely unlikely.
Similar threads
