Topic: Microtrack II - Part 2

[Brian Skalinder]

I will also try decoding a flac back to wav and see if it still shows it as 24/48 or did it change to 16/48 or 16/44, then I'll know if something is wrong.

No need, this won't reveal anything.  The decoded file will precisely match the file before it was encoded to FLAC.  It won't change the WAV properties, or reveal the actual bit depth of the data stream, or anything like that.

[Rockinman59]

I will also try decoding a flac back to wav and see if it still shows it as 24/48 or did it change to 16/48 or 16/44, then I'll know if something is wrong.

No need, this won't reveal anything.  The decoded file will precisely match the file before it was encoded to FLAC.  It won't change the WAV properties, or reveal the actual bit depth of the data stream, or anything like that.

Thanks for that info.  SF has a bit depth and sample rate window at the bottom when you open a wav file (that could be it's bit meter) and my wav's do show 24 bit and 48000 sample rate, that's why it's so strange that the compressed flacs equal the size of the 16 bit files I already did. 

[Brian Skalinder]

SF has a bit depth and sample rate window at the bottom when you open a wav file (that could be it's bit meter) and my wav's do show 24 bit and 48000 sample rate, that's why it's so strange that the compressed flacs equal the size of the 16 bit files I already did.

The FLAC / 16-bit file size thing is just a coincidence.  I'm not familiar with Soundforge, so I don't know the answer, but the question is:  does the 24-bit / 48000 sample rate window at the bottom show the actual bit depth of the data itself, or the bit depth as documented in the WAV header (which is what you see when you view Properties of the file in Windows Explorer, for example).  What you want is a tool in SF that shows you the bit depth of the actual data, not just what's the bit depth as recorded in the WAV header.

Someone posted a free bit depth plugin a while back, I think...let me see if I can find it. (Or perhaps someone will chime in with their knowledge of SF.)

[anhisr]

I use to use SF and the number in the lower panel is just the info from the wav header.  I don't know if it has a bit rate meter as part of the program. 

[Rockinman59]

Thanks guys for the help here.  I could open a 24 bit wav file in SF and go to Process>Bit Depth Converter and it would show the current bit depth and sample rate of the wav file, wouldn't it?  That might be the closest thing to a bit meter other than the panels at the bottom.  I made the mistake on my first attempt at recording at 24/48, didn't switch the UA5 to 48 kHz and the wav file opened in SF as 24 bit, 44,1000 sample rate so I know it tells you the bit depth and sample rate of the wav file you opened, but as far as the bit depth of the data itself I'm not sure.  I guess I just don't understand the difference.

[Brian Skalinder]

I could open a 24 bit wav file in SF and go to Process>Bit Depth Converter and it would show the current bit depth and sample rate of the wav file, wouldn't it?

Maybe.  I'm not sure how SF captures that information.  It might simply show the bit depth and sample rate in the WAV header, and not the actual bit depth and sample rate of the data itself.  More on that in a minute.

FWIW, Jason provided a couple plugin bit-meter options here:  http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,123142.msg1640080.html#msg1640080

I know it tells you the bit depth and sample rate of the wav file you opened, but as far as the bit depth of the data itself I'm not sure.  I guess I just don't understand the difference.

Very basically, a WAV file is made up of two different parts:  the header and the data.*  The header stores merely descriptive information about the data within the file:  stereo or mono, bit depth, sample rate, etc.  The data itself is, well...the data itself, and is encoded however the ADC outputs it.  Here's the thing:  the header and the data don't have to match...and they don't always.

Usually, when there's a mismatch, it's because the header sample rate doesn't match the data sample rate.  For example, the header says the file is 48k, but the data is actually 44.1k.  But most software simply checks the header to find out the file format information, like bit depth, sample rate, etc.:  if the header says the file is 24-bit, then the software assumes it's correct.  The result:  the software plays the file at 48k, even though the data's actually 44.1k...and the recording sounds too fast, like chipmunks singing -- it's very easy to identify when mismatches in sample rate occur

But there can also be a mismatch between the header's bit depth and the data's bit depth.  For example, the header can say the file is 24-bit, but the data itself might only be 16-bit.  When the bit depth is mismatched, though, you probably can't hear the difference...hence the need for a bit meter that actually reads the data itself, rather than relying on the header information.  And that's why you need a "bit meter"...to read the format of the data itself, not the header.  Some software has this feature built-in, others require plugins, like the ones linked above.  Clear as mud? 

* Lots more detailed info here:  WAV PCM soundfile format

[jerryfreak]

thanks i had similar issues with the MTI, and despite the fact that many here have said the MTII is 100% relable, i still am wary of using one as a primary recorder

Hoo boy. I just finished five days (10 hours/day) live recording, using the MicroTrack II as the bit-bucket for most of it. I have some things to report ... but I need a night's sleep first.

A quick summary, though: In general it worked very well, but because of a few glitches (one of which may have cost me nearly three hours of a valuable recording) I don't quite trust this recorder yet. Still, it seems close to being a rather great little recording device, I think.

[Rockinman59]

Thanks for all this info Brian.  It's a bit overwhelming since I'm new at this 24 bit thing.  I did play a 24 bit file decoded back to wav from a flac and it's normal speed (no chipmunks lol).

I was able to create flac files with cd wav editor and came out with 1.48 gb which I'm told is normal for level 8 compression.  I just don't know why Flac Frontend is compressing it to under 1 gb total file size.

I've uploaded the source and have a few tapers who are grabbing it and they'll tell me if I screwed up or it doesn't sound like 24 bit.

I agree I'm not 100% comfortable with the Microtrack II recording 24 bit even though SF shows it as 24/48 and cd wav editor does too.  I'll try 24/96 the next time with my UA5 and see what happens!

[taperwheeler]

My last recording (mics>v3spdif>mt2) attempt had a strange result.  Had my v3 set at 48khz...recorded in 24 bit.  The saved files showed up as 24bit 44.1 khz.  I assumed that I must've mistakenly left the v3 at 44.1.  When I went to edit, the files loaded as 44.1, but on playback, were slow and dragging.  I changed them, not converted to 48khz and they sounded fine.  First time something like that's happened to me and found it a bit weird that the mt2 gave them a 44.1 header.

[jerryfreak]

no it wouldnt. if you guys are talking about what i think you are (16bit files masquerading as 24-bit), it is actually a 24-bit data file, but the last 8bits are all zeros.

2 ways to do it:
use the bit depth meter link, or wavelab has that as well as a standard feature

record something into it peaking at really low levels, like -50 or below, then normalize it to zero. you'll know right away if you were working with 24 bits of data

Thanks guys for the help here.  I could open a 24 bit wav file in SF and go to Process>Bit Depth Converter and it would show the current bit depth and sample rate of the wav file, wouldn't it?  That might be the closest thing to a bit meter other than the panels at the bottom.  I made the mistake on my first attempt at recording at 24/48, didn't switch the UA5 to 48 kHz and the wav file opened in SF as 24 bit, 44,1000 sample rate so I know it tells you the bit depth and sample rate of the wav file you opened, but as far as the bit depth of the data itself I'm not sure.  I guess I just don't understand the difference.

[engorgement]

Stupid question maybe...
Just bought a battery box(SP-SPSB-11) for my microtrack 2.
I also bought a 1/4 to 1/8 adapter, but I picked the wrong one, the not ballanaced one.
My question is if I can use the ordinary mic input with this bb(its 12v) without frying my mic(sony ecm-719, I have ca-14 ordered).

[jbell]

I just got a Hydra 1/8 to 2 TRS's to use with my MTII, but it isn't balanced.  Am I going to have problems using this cable?  If so what are you guys using that will work?  Someone please steer me in the right direction.  I have read the thread, but doesn't seem to confirm any cable that will for sure work.  Thanks

[KenH]

Hopping on the MT II thread to learn about my recently purchase...

[DeepCreatures]

Hopping on the MT II thread to learn about my recently purchase...

2nd this - just purchased one myself and have been reading up on things.

[taperwheeler]

I just got a Hydra 1/8 to 2 TRS's to use with my MTII, but it isn't balanced.  Am I going to have problems using this cable?  If so what are you guys using that will work?  Someone please steer me in the right direction.  I have read the thread, but doesn't seem to confirm any cable that will for sure work.  Thanks

You'll be fine with the cable you purchased as long as you keep the gain on the mt2 all the way down.  If you don't have an external preamp and will need to use the gain on the recorder, you'll need a specially wired cable.  Sound pro's or several cable makers here at ts can build you one.  For what it's worth, I would look at running an external pre with the mt2.  It's internal pre is a tad noisy, even running at low levels of gain.  Do some living room testing with a quiet background.  Record and increase your gain.  On playback you'll heAR and get a feel for where your limits are on the pre.  I think mine got a bit noisy around 1/3 of the way up on gain increase.