How important is 24bit in Sample Librarys for you?
What do you expect from upcoming sample librarys.
Thanks,
Chris Hein
How important is 24bit in Sample Librarys?
-
- KVRist
- 150 posts since 9 Oct, 2005 from Cologne, Germany
Chris Hein - Horns:
http://www.chrishein.net
http://www.chrishein.net
-
- KVRian
- 1469 posts since 18 Sep, 2004 from Suffolk, UK
There really should be another option that reads: "I prefer 16bit because it takes up less space on my HD and there is no discernable difference in quality"
Still, I chose 16bit
Still, I chose 16bit
-
- KVRAF
- 1789 posts since 17 Mar, 2004 from Bretagne, the west of France
-
- KVRAF
- 2285 posts since 20 Dec, 2002 from The Benighted States of Trumpistan
I slightly prefer 24-bit, but bitrate is far from the most important issue. 16 bits at 44.1 kHz, if recorded and produced well, with quality converters, is plenty sufficient.
Plus, it seems to me that a sound card has a constant ability to make distinctions, so I suspect there may be a tradeoff between larger numbers (bit rates and depths) and quality of each act of sampling. But I'm probably wrong about that, and obviously a 4-bit recording at 1kHz is going to sound like crap, so it's not absolute. Still, I believe 16 bits is fine.
Plus, it seems to me that a sound card has a constant ability to make distinctions, so I suspect there may be a tradeoff between larger numbers (bit rates and depths) and quality of each act of sampling. But I'm probably wrong about that, and obviously a 4-bit recording at 1kHz is going to sound like crap, so it's not absolute. Still, I believe 16 bits is fine.
Wait... loot _then_ burn? D'oh!
-
- Banned
- 5089 posts since 12 Jun, 2001 from Wusik Dot Com
It depends. If you record in 16 bits, is one thing. But if you record in 24, normalize, edit the sample, and save in 16 bits, is a whole dif story.
On my experiences, 24 bits a 48Khz sounds more "analog", but that's me I guess.
Wk
On my experiences, 24 bits a 48Khz sounds more "analog", but that's me I guess.
Wk
-
Reverse Engineer Reverse Engineer https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=9129
- KVRAF
- 4968 posts since 23 Sep, 2003 from Glasgow
When i play 24 bit files in musicmatch it becomes white noise if i ffwd the track to say, halfway though (or two thirds, or even a quarter, or anywhere really,) and if i rwnd it it's still white noise til i stop and start again.) So i say 24 or 16.
-
- KVRAF
- 2312 posts since 9 Jun, 2002 from East of Santa Monica
In a well-made production, I doubt anyone but a savant could tell the difference (between 16 and 24 bit samples).
But that's just samples. I record at 24 bit for the extra headroom.
JD
But that's just samples. I record at 24 bit for the extra headroom.
JD
-
- KVRian
- 873 posts since 16 Dec, 2004
funny thing is DVD audio, (24/96) when I listen to that its like night and day compared to a cd, but Ive downmixed a dvd audio track to cd quality, and it still sounds way better then any cd Ive ever heard, so it really comes down to the recording techniques used imho (mostly) I suppose the studios that make dvd audio discs just use better equipment, or just care moreflugel45 wrote:In a well-made production, I doubt anyone but a savant could tell the difference (between 16 and 24 bit samples).
But that's just samples. I record at 24 bit for the extra headroom.
JD
-
syncopated_silence syncopated_silence https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=61569
- KVRist
- 181 posts since 15 Mar, 2005 from Éire
24 gives better signal to noise floor ratio, so for acoustics - yea why not? it's the higher the sample rate that will give more detail, anything over 96 is overkill tho i think...
-
- KVRian
- 1469 posts since 18 Sep, 2004 from Suffolk, UK
Well saidflugel45 wrote:In a well-made production, I doubt anyone but a savant could tell the difference (between 16 and 24 bit samples).
But that's just samples. I record at 24 bit for the extra headroom.
JD