I normally master for videos and streaming where 32bit and 48k and their multiples is the norm. Information on what format platform expects is public. Video norms are aac format 32 bit audio and 48k. Audible differences are not there between 44.1 and 48k. I have not released a physical cd in quite a while. When I do I will likely convert to 44.1
16 bit recordings offer less head room than 24 bit or 32 bit. Though an experienced audio professional can still record and work with 16 bit. It is less optimal for advanced recordings.
final master atleast in my case is almost always a streaming platform. Video and audio.
You donāt have to be an experienced professional to record in 16 bit. Your graphic is grossly misrepresentational. As I said in the previous post, you have 96 db of headroom with 16 bits. Unless you have exceptional circumstances you are only going to need about 10 db of that headroom.
it tends to happen quite often when you deal with home recordingsā¦ specially of high power wind instruments lol. Trombones, bassoons are specially notorious. Some flutes can easily cause chaos as well. I have been happier recording in 24 bit with 144db snr.
I have heard drummers prefer 24 bit as well. Sample rates wont matter as much here as bit depth. Sometimes a little more wiggle room makes life easier and worth the switch. Though I have not had the need to record in 32 bit yet but that is largely due to file size concerns.
With respect, the implication is nonsense. The dynamic range of these instruments is not going to exceed 30 db; 16 bits is more than enough for this application.
if it was nonsense professionals woudnt be changing to 24 bit depth. These instruments can easily break the range of 100 db just the rimshot of a snare alone can hit 100+ db in. the variation from the ghost notes to some bigger hits.
Same with a trombone and some other wind instruments that have the power to hit well above. Their dynamic range exceeds the limitation of the snr in 16bit. While these can be be worked around, you are always struggling to capture the right timbre. Fiddling with gain knobs till the right sound is achieved.
I have had my flute mic captured by some technicians and they can never capture the tone or the timbre right. Very few can actually. My fellow flautist and friend, Grammy winner Woulter Kellerman has the same problem. He only works with 24 bit and his recording engineer works with 24 bit. I have not found many professionals in the industry in 2020+ era that are still working with 16 bit recordings, unless they have a creative reasoning behind it.
answer to which ? I switched to 24 bit recording long time ago I have personally found that it is better when it comes to recording high dynamic range instuments. I was having trouble with 16 bit recordings on loud notes. For instance 36 inch orchestral bass drums, trumpets, contrabass, gold flutes and other drums. I have not had many issues once I switched.
It allows for more flexibility while recording live performances and even some dynamic solo performances.
Maybe, but itās not enough for this thread. The topic is Hi Res and the journey we collectively take in that process.
I started bouncing cassettes in the 70s. Then recording to R2R with dbx noise reduction, and mixing down to cassettes with dbx type 1 too.
Im looking at other avenues than what PCM has to offer. Whether it be fun or difficult, I like the learning curve and the people who are willing to discuss this subject politely.
Itās really hard to make friends thatāll cheer you on in all this.
I thought I was satified when running cassettes! Whoa! Lol.
Ah yes, but they were all rhetorical questions. Part of a monologue, an introduction if you will.
The part that gets scrutinized by you isnt even the subject matter at hand. So far it seems your agenda is to blow off some steam regarding an antiquated recording method.
It would be nice to stick with the design of this thread if you can.
Unless youāre happy being the resident troll. I dunno, I havenāt been on this forum very long and your bullying is unimpressive and immature.
Read the posts by other contributors here. None of them have that pent up meanstreak you have been displaying. Not one!
Cāmon man! Itās not that difficult to be nice. Thanks.
great interview thanks. Yes that is consistent with the brief talks I have had with movie sound producers. Most samples I had to work with were 24bit 96k files. Their main reasons to record that way was to have precise control over the transients (as the interview briefly talks about). They deliberately wanted the massive transients and the data of the natural reverb of their studio also recorded in the same file. Something that is very hard to do with 16 bit recordings (though still possible). That is main reason for the industry switch to 24 bit. Drum and bass recordings have improved over the years.
Returning to that initial statement, Iām starting to think in terms of āproductā offerings - typically a business will try to package and offer 3 alternatives or products: Premium/Platinum; Middle-Range/Standard; Budget/Low-Cost/Free. That way they can cover the realms of consumers they are likely to encounter. Of course, āboutiqueā businesses may only offer one high-end option.
I think itās necessary and important for some to pursue this Hi Res option, as you are passionate about. However, itās just not going to be for everyone at this time, nor appeal to their sensibilities. I say that based partly on my own experience and opinion, and the detracting opinions you have encountered. Yours is pushing the high-end envelope, some will go for the higher-res middle ground based on industry trends and needs, and some will stick with the basics.
The video from the post quoted above suggested this link (below), which I took a look at. It gave me a little more insight into a studio using this technology, and the artists working with them. Am I interested? Yes. Like Iām interested in the lure of performance vehicles like Ferrari and Corvette. Will I ever buy one? Probably not.
That said, I think that you offering this information is helpful and informative. Thereās always a cutting edge to be aware of, even if we personally are not there yet. Itās like the Bell Curve; a small contingent will go strongly one way, another small contingent will go strongly the other way, and some mass in the middle will consider the center - and to some degree the other perspectives. Itās a natural statistical probability.
. https://www.psaudio.com/product-category/octave-artist-masters/
will listen later but it would be impossible to tell in a youtube video that is already re-sampled to 32 bit aac, and the avc codec. So essentially I am hearing everything in 32 bit depth, 384 k bit rate enveloped in assuming an mp4 wrapper lol
do you have audio files for these somewhere other than youtube?
but either way my guess is that the middle one is what I prefer ( around 6:00) over the other 2 for some reason, but not a fan of either of the 3 mixes. However, I also dont know if these are live recordings of some live performance.
The only difference is that these were exported to different rates, and yes the Youtube medium is part of my experiment process.
Tangent Alert: Thereās lots of talk these days about mixing on headphones for a myriad of reasons that are outside the recording studio or mastering lab environment. Yet, they still come into play when proponents say they are mixing for people who listen mostly on ear devices.
Soā¦are there also subtle differences in export rates when comparing them over the YouTube codices?
Your response of choosing the middle one is notated and your gift card will arrive soon! Thanks.
If you are trying to avoid aliasing artifacts, the common practice is to oversample before you run it through plugins. Then downsample during rendering.
Depending on what video codec you used to make your youtube video, youtube will upsample or downsample everything to 48k Opus format regardless of what format was uploaded (such is the case with your video. Your video is playing Opus audio format).
Which means if you resampled it more than twice, chances of artifacts increase everytime to a point where it will be audible. Best practice to upload to youtube is to sample everything to 48k and nothing higher or lower. Then YT leaves your mixes alone and merely turns the volume down if it is too loud.
I have personally found that it is better when it comes to recording high dynamic range instuments. I was having trouble with 16 bit recordings on loud notes. For instance 36 inch orchestral bass drums, trumpets, contrabass, gold flutes and other drums. I have not had many issues once I switched.
