Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Analog to 24bit question  (Read 22119 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dmccabe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #45 on: December 11, 2007, 03:35:25 PM »
On the Official Releases page, there are links to the trackers that have all those shows seeded. EVERY show is seeded in 24-bit and 16-bit. Go download 1 song from any of those shows, get the 16-bit version and the 24-bit version of the same song. Compare them.

This is an example of where transferring a cassette to 24-bit sounds different than 16-bit.

You might want to pick an older show to get the most noticeable difference, like one of the Garcia Legion of Mary shows from 1975. Mics were placed on stage at the Keystone in San Francisco taped by Bob Menke. Very good sounding master with huge dynamic range. Listen especially to the horns.

Same master tape... for both 16-bit and 24-bit versions. We seed the 16-bit for CD burns. Not everyone has access to burn DVD-A.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2007, 03:37:57 PM by dmccabe »

easy jim

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #46 on: December 11, 2007, 03:43:41 PM »
As for going to 16-bit from a 24-bit source...

Most top mastering engineers (I am not going to drop a name here, but think the entire Hendrix remastered catalog) take their 24/192 digital masters and send them back out to analog... then back into 16-bit/44.1 A/D of their choice for Cd master... rather than dither them in software. Anyone who states that once it is "digital it should stay digital"... is not doing what the top mastering engineers are doing in LA today.

I concur with all the major points dmccabe has made, especially pertaining to recordings originally captured as analog masters.

Furthermore, even with 24 bit files that were originally recorded as a 24bit digital signal, most top mastering engineers will take the final mix through a D>A>signal processing>A>D signal chain for ultimate mastering.  The reason: very few sound engineers would maintain that any digital signal processing - whether on a DAW or with digital external hardware - is as accurate or 'sounds as good' as signal processing through top quality (and generally vintage) analog gear.  Point me to a plug-in that can EQ as well as an Orban 622B ParaEQ (for one example), or a comressor/limiter that sounds as good on a master bus as a pair of the vintage DBX 165a/160, etc (for another example).  


Offline dmccabe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #47 on: December 11, 2007, 03:54:43 PM »
There is also a trend going away from digital mixing... a company called Dangerous makes an analog summing buss.

You take your individual 24/192 digital tracks that you recorded with the musicians in the studio... and send each track out to a very-high quality DAC... then you MIX all the tracks in ANALOG. Engineers swear this sounds better than digital mixing. More natural in the way the tracks lay. Then the final mix goes BACK to final digital in many modes... 16/44.1 for the CD master and other rates for other releases but all from that same analog mix.

BTW, an 16x2 channel Dangerous Summing Box costs: List $2,999.00
How many channels does your band need?

here is more info on the subject: http://www.studioreviews.com/summing-box-shootout.htm

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #48 on: December 11, 2007, 03:59:52 PM »
And one step futher, but much more contemporary, is the Grace ANSR.
Were you running it, or no?
Do you want to further change that?

Interesting thought.  I ran ANSR, quite a bit.  I generally didn't edit those recordings in post, but I did on a few occasions.  For some reason I thought ANSR is different from traditional dither, though I couldn't tell you why.  ???.

I haven't used that on my V3, but I suppose it's a 'noise shaped' or 'colored' dither like UV22 and others that attempt to put more of the dither noise in regions that are less audible because of the non-linear low level sensitivity of the ear (out of the midrange).

Quote
...
If the answer to going back into the analog realm is to leverage the sonic characteristics of the intermediate analog gear, that's one thing.  But if it's to avoid double-dither, or some other issue, I'm still not grasping why it's better.


I don't think it's the double-dither, double-dipper.  There's actually more dithering going on with the analog route since there is another A>D step in there.  

I can imagine that increasing the sample rate of an existing digital file by doing a D>A>D conversion with quality gear may sound better than using a digital sample rate conversion algorithm because of rounding errors in the complex math involved when doing it digitally.  I'd think increasing the bit depth digitally to edit the file with more precision would not be a problem though since you're just increasing the word length with zeros.. no complex math.

If so that would mean a 16/44.1 > 24/44.1 (or 32/44.1 or 64/44.1) digital conversion is just as good as going the analog route (excluding any nice 'coloration' the analog stuff my add of course) as long as you don't change the sample rate.

^^
That applies to adding zeros to the bit depth only, not converting sample frequency up or down converting bit depth or sample rate.  It also doesn't address any processing done later in the rarified air of the mastering suite, as easyjim noted.

Does that jibe with your observations, dmccabe?
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline dmccabe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #49 on: December 11, 2007, 04:10:42 PM »
The ANSR is the name of the Grace Design dither... for 16-bit only. It is off in 24-bit.
It sounds great for going to 16-bit.

So if you had a DAT that needs some patches.
You could transfer the DAT to analog (Benchmark DAC-1) then back into your V3 to 24/96.
Then do your patches or any other edits.
Then take that edited digital 24/96 and go back out again to analog...
into the line in*** of the V3 and use the V3 as the A/D to 16-bit using the ANSR dithering.

That would result in one dithering.

Don't underestimate what a good DAC can do for your sound.
They also double as a high-end headphone monitoring device.

When you edit your digital 24/96 files, what are you listening to? Are you sure?
If your headphone or speakers are playing out of your computer... through what?
What DAC is going to your headphones or speakers?

If you are using a $100 audio card... you are not really listening to the 24/96 file...


***the "line in" on a stock V3 is really set for the impedance of a mic signal... not a line signal.
You can still feed a line in source to a V3, but to be "perfect" and match the impedance, you need the mod.
Micheal Grace did a special mod for our gear to allow mic or line in (you have to open the case and change jumpers to go back and forth). You can have him mod your V3 if you want to use you V3 as a A/D from line sources.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2007, 04:21:49 PM by dmccabe »

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #50 on: December 11, 2007, 04:19:15 PM »
...You take your individual 24/192 digital tracks that you recorded with the musicians in the studio... and send each track out to a very-high quality DAC... then you MIX all the tracks in ANALOG. Engineers swear this sounds better than digital mixing. More natural in the way the tracks lay. Then the final mix goes BACK to final digital in many modes... 16/44.1 for the CD master and other rates for other releases but all from that same analog mix...

So funny how going forward sometimes mean looking back.  So the next to uber quality step is to sum in the air? Play each track through it's own dedicated monitor and sum it all in the air to a fresh stereo pair sampled at every rate you'll ever need.  Let's bust out the Yamaha player pianos, the robotic drummers, re-invent the old theater organs but replace the old paper rolls with CNC controllers, all so the actual sound of the instrument is plucked on each playback, just like in the parlors of robber barons of the 1920's.  F%ck MTV, I want my full animatronic GratefulDead that I can arrange in my living room, and Bear/Healy can program the piano roll.

Apologies for the swerve, my brain needed a diversion.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #51 on: December 11, 2007, 04:23:55 PM »
So if you had a DAT that needs some patches.
You could transfer the DAT to analog to 24/96.
Then do your patches or any other edits.
Then take that edited digital 24/96 and go back out again to analog...
into the line in*** of the V3 and use the V3 as the A/D to 16-bit using the ANSR dithering.

That would result in one dithering.

I don't understand.  The dither noise from the first dither (V3 w/ ANSR on > DAT) is still in the signal, even if you convert it to analog and then back to digital.  So aren't you still dithering twice?  There just happens to be an analog generation in between (which may matter, but if it does, I'm not clear why from your statements).
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline dmccabe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #52 on: December 11, 2007, 04:44:11 PM »
When you use a good DAC, it uses its internal SRC to add 8 bits of dither to the incoming 16-bit digital signal. This increases the apparent data depth to 24 bits. The added dither pushes the quantization residue without adding to the recording’s noise floor. So your new analog signal has 24-bits instead of 16. That's where the difference is instead of just using software to upsample a 16-bit to 24-bit. The hardware version is more "accurate" -- sounds better.

So, yes you are adding a dither in that stage, but it's an "up" dither... the ones that are destructive are when you are going from higher to lower. That's when the word length gets reduced... so that's where you only want the one "down" dither.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2007, 04:50:00 PM by dmccabe »

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #53 on: December 11, 2007, 04:48:51 PM »
When you use a good DAC, it uses its internal SRC to adds 8 bits of dither to the incoming 16-bit digital signal. This increases the apparent data depth to 24 bits. The added dither pushes the quantization residue without adding to the recording’s noise floor.

So, yes you are adding a dither in that stage, but it's an "up" dither... the ones that are destructive are when you are going from higher to lower. That's when the word length gets reduced... so that's where you only want the one "down" dither.

SRC?  Only SRC I know is Sample Rate Conversion, which is a different animal than bit-depth and dither.

Interesting.  But even though you're adding "up" dither, the original "down" dither noise is still in the signal.  So you really have 1 down dither + 1 up dither + 1 down dither (the final down dither) once back in the digital realm.  So there are still 2 down dithers.  Does the DAC "up" dither somehow negate the previous "down" dither?
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline dmccabe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #54 on: December 11, 2007, 04:54:07 PM »
They don't think they ever negate each other... and yes, the less dithers the better... but the last dither is always the most critical. If you keep going back and forth too many times between analog and digital, I am sure you are going to start introducing audible artifacts. You have to plan ahead. The lesser of two evils. If you edit a 16-bit in software with a 32-bit plugin... you are technically dithering there too...
« Last Edit: December 11, 2007, 04:57:03 PM by dmccabe »

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #55 on: December 11, 2007, 04:59:52 PM »
I think you want to dither anytime you convert bit depth downwards or anytime you move between the analog and digital worlds, in either direction. No?
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Roving Sign

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #56 on: December 11, 2007, 05:08:07 PM »
Question about MOTB approach for analog transfers:

Do you add gain during the transfer or just take the tape to the AD at a unity setting?

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #57 on: December 11, 2007, 05:09:13 PM »
They don't think they ever negate each other... and yes, the less the better... but the last dither is always the most critical.

I understand less dither is better.  My point is that regardless of whether one takes the original recording into the analog realm or not, the final audio still contains noise from two "down" dithers:

<A>  (dither 1) 16-bit master > DAC > ADC (24-bit or 32bfp) > edit at 24-bit or 32bfp > dither to target output (dither 2)
<B>  (dither 1) 16-bit master > edit at 24-bit or 32bfp > dither to target output (dither 2)

(As I hope the above two examples illustrate), both still have dither noise from two different "down" dithers.  So I still don't understand how/why one is better than the other.  I guess I'll poke around online for references / documentation (if you have any to share, I'd like to check them out) to help me better understand why one is better than the other.

On a related note:  does the software MOTB uses for edits use 24-bit or 32bfp internal precision?  And if the latter, wouldn't it make sense to convert 16-bit > DAC > ADC > 32bfp?
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Roving Sign

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #58 on: December 11, 2007, 05:17:29 PM »

On a related note:  does the software MOTB uses for edits use 24-bit or 32bfp internal precision?  And if the latter, wouldn't it make sense to convert 16-bit > DAC > ADC > 32bfp?

Taking that notion one step further - why not start with a 32bfp fileset on the analog transfers also? If 24 is better, why not 32?

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Analog to 24bit question
« Reply #59 on: December 11, 2007, 05:25:03 PM »
Are we talking about increasing the bit depth and leaving the sample rate unchanged or is the sample rate being increased as well?
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.083 seconds with 43 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF