Just powered up my new (latest firmware) DP 24. I don't plan on transferring files to computer. Is there any advantage of recording at 24 bit? Sample rate set to 48k? Thanks.
Bit and sample rate question...
- Thread starter madison2701
- Start date
Dennis FMRJE
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2014
- Messages
- 77
- Karma
- 5
- Gear owned
- Two DP-24s, 2488, 788
To my ears, there is no difference between 44.1 and 48k sample rates. (44.1 was only developed to prevent consumers from making exact digital copies of the broadcast standard 48K audio on the DAT machines we were obviously all going to buy.). However, I hear a noticeable, if not to say huge, difference between 16 but and 24 bit depth. If I was worried about disk space, I'd record at 24-bit 44.1k... If not, at the highest rate and depth my system would allow.
This doesn't mean that sample rate doesn't matter. There is an enormous difference between 48 and 96K... theres ust not enough extra data between 44.1 and 48 to really hear.
This doesn't mean that sample rate doesn't matter. There is an enormous difference between 48 and 96K... theres ust not enough extra data between 44.1 and 48 to really hear.
Arjan P
Soundaholic
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2012
- Messages
- 1,699
- Karma
- 1,234
- From
- Netherlands
- Website
- www.soundbyte.nl
- Gear owned
- DM3200 IFFW
48k may be a higher rate, but unless you really need that sample rate, you usually will be changing it back to 44.1 later, which is never better then to start and stay at 44.1.
Using 24 bit over 16 bit resolution however is very much worth it, since you'll have much much more dynamic range in the digital signal. This makes it less important to record hot (close to 0 dB) and results in a much better signal.
EDIT: Ah, almost posted the same time with Jim. Here's a good article on bit depth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_bit_depth
Using 24 bit over 16 bit resolution however is very much worth it, since you'll have much much more dynamic range in the digital signal. This makes it less important to record hot (close to 0 dB) and results in a much better signal.
EDIT: Ah, almost posted the same time with Jim. Here's a good article on bit depth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_bit_depth
Arjan, you are correct, sir. Now, if you're up for 24-bit samples at a rate of 96K, that's totally the hot set up.
Arjan P
Soundaholic
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2012
- Messages
- 1,699
- Karma
- 1,234
- From
- Netherlands
- Website
- www.soundbyte.nl
- Gear owned
- DM3200 IFFW
The DP-24 does not like 24bit/44.1 kHz recording. Clicks and pops appear within locate points during recording and/or playback. It does not happen when playback or recording from the beginning of the song to the end. It is a problem with the DP24 and DP32 as noted in this and other forums. If the clicks and pops don't bother you then record at 24 bit.
captdan
In Memoriam
To jump in and and muddy the waters................
I agree with Jim that there's a perceivable qualitative difference between 44.1/48 and 96kz. There's also an equally perceivable difference between 24 and 16 bit. But there's more going on than just sample rate frequencies. The DAC/ADC architecture and design, specific to the system being judged, is as much a part of that ratio as the sample rate itself.
Simply put: if a console or converter over samples at 96/192kz, then material tracked at those S/Rs will perform at it's theoretical best. But if a 48kz ADC/DAC is used to judge upsampled material inside a 96kz environment, there will likely be no arithmetical or qualitative increase in performance. But - there COULD be less likelihood of audio artifacts within the audible bands - something to be considered by mastering engineers working with material produced on older digital systems.
CaptDan
I agree with Jim that there's a perceivable qualitative difference between 44.1/48 and 96kz. There's also an equally perceivable difference between 24 and 16 bit. But there's more going on than just sample rate frequencies. The DAC/ADC architecture and design, specific to the system being judged, is as much a part of that ratio as the sample rate itself.
Simply put: if a console or converter over samples at 96/192kz, then material tracked at those S/Rs will perform at it's theoretical best. But if a 48kz ADC/DAC is used to judge upsampled material inside a 96kz environment, there will likely be no arithmetical or qualitative increase in performance. But - there COULD be less likelihood of audio artifacts within the audible bands - something to be considered by mastering engineers working with material produced on older digital systems.
CaptDan
