Lots of times I'll bounce down a vocal/guitar/etc. track that I'm happy with the FX/EQ, reverb and so on, to save CPU cycles for other FX in the song. I'll keep a non-bounced version of the song, in case I change my mind, of course.
In the bad old (tape) days, when you'd bounce a track down you'd lose a tiny bit of signal each time you'd bounce down.
This may seem like an elementary question, but does this happen with digital recordings? If I record in 24-bit and bounce to 24-bit, is there any signal loss? My pc can probably - probably - continue to handle the track with all the FX, but, like a lot of recording musicians, I've lost stuff through a crash after loading too many plugins, and I just feel safer having a bounced-down version of the track. Yes, I know I can "freeze" the track, but most of the time I really am done with it, so why freeze instead of bouncing? Besides, if I "un-freeze," i'm stuck with the same problem again anyway, right?
This question has bugged me for a while, and don't know if there's a ready answer. My ears tell me there isn't a difference between the original and bounced tracks, but I'd sure like to know for sure, not having the best monitors or the experience to really tell the difference. Any ideas?
Q on Signal Degredation during Bouncedown
-
- KVRAF
- 7879 posts since 16 Apr, 2003 from -on the outside looking in
There is no signal loss - other than the digitization of the analogue signal (which is imperceptible to most depending on the bit depth and dithering). On your hard drive, no signal is lost; just like a word document - no info is lost unless it corrupts.
How your host handles it is another issue: I am unable to "freeze" stuff. But in general, if you record at 24 bit, that data will not change.
But there are others here much more knowledgable than me. Consider this a bump.
How your host handles it is another issue: I am unable to "freeze" stuff. But in general, if you record at 24 bit, that data will not change.
But there are others here much more knowledgable than me. Consider this a bump.
..what goes around comes around..
-
- KVRian
- 769 posts since 2 Apr, 2005
There has been a lot of debate in gear snob circles about whether there is any signal loss in what they call "mixing in the box". Some people think they can hear differences between normal playback and file rendering (when the audio is exported to a wave file faster than actual playback time). Depending on your host and/or plugins involved, there may or may not be differences in sound quality. For most major DAWs with 32bit internal processing, it would seem that there is zero difference. This can be proved by comparing the two waveforms. If mixed together, with one phase inverted, they will cancel out to zero, proving there is no difference. If d/a and a/d converters are used there may be a difference - but digital vs digital copies should be identical. BUT - and this is a bit BUT - rendering of plugins can vary, so it pays to check them. If in doubt, freeze or bounce them first so you know hat your getting. Downsampling is another issue. The quality of downsampling algorithms can vary. Voxengo has a very nice standalone if you aren't happy with the quality of your host downsampling. There is a lot of ideas and opinions about this subject - especially if you consider analog stuff in the chain. It's right up there with mastering secret formulas. Personally, i'm happy that Cubase SX gives me a quality that the high-end boys are still debating whether their ultra-expensive rigs can or cannot do the same job better.