home studios equipment staff/friends booking/rates for sale forum contact

16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not be

Moderators: kerble, Electrical-Staff

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby 24K on Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:37 pm

24K wrote: The closest I've ever been able to achieve is in the milliseconds realm. And it is noticeable.


To be clear when I've talked about monitoring latency it MS. Not samples.
The samples problem is when using plugs that either don't report their correct processing time (there is quite a few) & you sum the audio with the unprocessed signal.

Some plugs have massive amounts of latency, loading a plug from a UAD2 pcie card will add 128 samples roundtrip. A lot of these things are accumulative - the more that's added, the slower the whole system becomes.

A workaround is to not use any plugs when tracking / overdubbing (save for perhaps some vocal verb where latency is just predelay).

TBH since installing Neve clones (AML) i've found myself using less & less plugins. They're doing the heavy lifting, colouration, saturation. I'm EQ'ing with mic placement. Save for maybe some 8k shelf lift on the snare top mic, & some 65hz boost on the kick. Limiting where it's needed instead of compression. Everything is sounding a lot better for it.
User avatar
24K
mayor
mayor
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby total_douche on Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:57 pm

That makes sense. A lot of my views on the discussion probably come from my "I don't fuck with the signal unless I absolutely have to, and I don't use any more tracks than I have to" attitude. I'd just rather a recording in a basement sounded like a recording in a basement, if that makes sense. If I want to enrich the sound, I'll just use room mics, for example. Back when I was using samples for drums, I spent ages trying to figure out how to use delays and reverbs to make it sound like I wanted to, and the simpler solution turned out to be to take my computer into a friend's garage, crank the volume, and set up some room mics. It just seems like less work than fiddling with plugins to me.

In reality, I'm just really lazy and prefer a sound that's less polished. I once recorded some songs that two of my siblings wrote, and the honest truth is that I spent most of the tracking process napping (I was working a 7-day-a-week job at the time). My sister would give me the go-ahead to start tracking her drums, and I'd hit the record button and doze off until either she was finished playing or I heard a major mistake that might prompt another take. Good times; my "interface" was a USB mic, the computer's onboard sound card, and a PCI M-audio card, so I had three stereo inputs that I could separate into discrete tracks... after I removed all the signal noise!
User avatar
total_douche
meatball enthusiast
meatball enthusiast
 
Posts: 1287
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:11 pm
Location: Hastings, MN

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby 24K on Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:59 pm

I haven't tried the re-mic drum room technique but it makes sense to capture an actual room. Impulse responses, other reverb's etc are either too static or diffused whenever I've tried them.

You're probably better off not trying to hard to polish up recordings made with lower end gear. In the past I spent an inordinate amount of time & only attained 'slightly' better results.
User avatar
24K
mayor
mayor
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby total_douche on Sun Nov 26, 2017 12:45 am

These days I don't even worry about it, the Firestudio routes the audio, the not-quite-so-cheap mics work well enough, and the basement sounds better than I thought it would. I mostly just strategically place my microphones and maybe use a bit of EQ or compression. Tuning the drums makes a fair bit of difference. I've discovered that some nebulous combination of tuning and player technique is 90% of having good-sounding drum tracks (it reminds me of Mr. Weston's signature, actually), after that, it's not that hard, just a matter of what I want highlighted, hence mic position. I've been getting good results with a pair of condensors placed further away than normal overheads (acting halfway between an overhead and a room mic) and a kick mic these days, so I don't even feel the need to close mic the shells anymore. It mostly just takes care of itself; it sounds the way I want it to. It still sounds better than 80s gated reverb drums.
User avatar
total_douche
meatball enthusiast
meatball enthusiast
 
Posts: 1287
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:11 pm
Location: Hastings, MN

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby 24K on Sun Nov 26, 2017 7:28 am

total_douche wrote:It still sounds better than 80s gated reverb drums.


Is there anything that doesn't? What a garish decade, the colours, the sounds, the clothes. Everything was 'off'. No wonder there was such a strong reaction against it via the US & UK underground.

Presonus make some fairly decent gear so I reckon you're getting good results + If your getting the results you want via a simple mic setup then there isn't the need to add more variables & potential problems down the road.
User avatar
24K
mayor
mayor
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby projectMalamute on Sun Nov 26, 2017 10:34 am

24K wrote:
total_douche wrote:It still sounds better than 80s gated reverb drums.


Is there anything that doesn't? What a garish decade


and almost all that stuff was made with warm and punchy analog tape.
bandcamp
youtube
web site

Endeavor to persevere.
User avatar
projectMalamute
Supreme Commander at the Forefront
Supreme Commander at the Forefront
 
Posts: 1992
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 10:59 am
Location: Westfield MA

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby bishopdante on Sun Nov 26, 2017 1:14 pm

Not necessarily. Depeche Mode used Akai ADAM (horrible thing).

Eg:https://reverb.com/uk/item/5837601-akai-dr1200-a-dam-recording-system

Also of the '80s era were things like the Mitsubishi X800-series Prodigi machines, and the Sony DASH systems.

I've got a very funny photo somewhere of Sarm West stripped out, everything gone... but the only thing absolutely nobody wanted and left behind... was the framed gold-edged certificate saying "first sony digital reel to reel in the UK".

phpBB [media]


phpBB [media]


phpBB [media]
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision." - Bertrand Russell
User avatar
bishopdante
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
 
Posts: 4320
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:25 am
Location: London

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby Redline on Sun Nov 26, 2017 2:56 pm

phpBB [media]
User avatar
Redline
Present-day God
Present-day God
 
Posts: 9213
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:53 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby MRoyce on Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:01 pm

Even more relevant to this discussion, with each repeat delayed a bit more:
phpBB [media]
User avatar
MRoyce
convenience store
convenience store
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:39 am
Location: Herrgottsbescheisserle-Country

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby Redline on Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:16 pm

I just played both videos at the same time and blew my mind....
User avatar
Redline
Present-day God
Present-day God
 
Posts: 9213
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:53 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby 24K on Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:28 pm

projectMalamute wrote:
24K wrote:
total_douche wrote:It still sounds better than 80s gated reverb drums.


Is there anything that doesn't? What a garish decade


and almost all that stuff was made with warm and punchy analog tape.


"It's needs more tops Nigel! TOPS! (sniff)" - "What? More?" - "YES!!" - Nigel obligingly tops out the high shelf on his SSL & rue's his chances of ever receiving a Grammy. Shit goes down a storm over at SMASH HITS! thou. The end.
User avatar
24K
mayor
mayor
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby 24K on Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:37 pm

Redline wrote:I just played both videos at the same time and blew my mind....


Truth! Sounds like Jaki Liebezeit stuck on a groove while recording technology evolves around him.
User avatar
24K
mayor
mayor
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby Anthony Flack on Sun Nov 26, 2017 8:30 pm

24K wrote:I've developed a bad habit where I'm playing slightly ahead to compensate for DAW practise/recording.


Horrors. Thank god normal people don't try to live monitor through the DAW these days. It's 2017 you savage.

I guess if anybody wants to have a jam via Skype from the other side of the world you would be the person to call.
Anthony Flack
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
 
Posts: 8923
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:27 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby MRoyce on Mon Nov 27, 2017 4:25 am

On any recent system it should be possible to get the overall latency into the 3-5ms range, which is the same latency you'd get when standing 2 meters away from you amp.
User avatar
MRoyce
convenience store
convenience store
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:39 am
Location: Herrgottsbescheisserle-Country

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby Anthony Flack on Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:58 pm

Well that's all right!

Back in the day the latency through the DAW was atrocious, which is why everybody started monitoring from the input instead. I don't know what 24K is doing that requires playing ahead of the beat, but it's usually the case that the DAW will compensate for any playback latency when recording and sync input to output.
Anthony Flack
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
 
Posts: 8923
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:27 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby bishopdante on Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:34 pm

Zero latency monitoring is done automatically by most audio interfaces - the monitoring audio is an all-analogue signal routed straight from input to monitor, so often you don't actually hear the digitised audio until playback.

On older 16 or 20 bit systems with converters of dubious quality this could produce an embarrassing or perplexing situation, where on listening back "hey... why does it sound... lifeless/shit?"
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision." - Bertrand Russell
User avatar
bishopdante
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
 
Posts: 4320
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:25 am
Location: London

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is just fine and 24 bit 192 kHz may not

Postby 24K on Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:28 pm

Anthony Flack wrote:I don't know what 24K is doing that requires playing ahead of the beat, but it's usually the case that the DAW will compensate for any playback latency when recording and sync input to output.


I'm using Ableton at home - it doesn't automatically align audio if you monitor through the channel you record on. Why monitor through a DAW? Different signal chains + effects etc.

The workaround is too add another channel, turn monitoring 'off' & it will align the audio. Before I figured this out, on playback I used to think I was playing behind, so I 'pushed' my playing to get it in time.

My first digital recording experience was the Roland VS-840, it was a limited frustrating thing. It used Zip disks (100MB) as it's medium which put a constraint on how long a track could be. The disks also routinely died for no reason.

For people just getting into digital recording I think the booming market in home recording has brought quality levels up & prices down to the point that great & stable results can be had. For people using it a bit longer (well me anyway) they've had their hands bitten a few times & still harbour doubts.
User avatar
24K
mayor
mayor
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:39 pm

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gramsci, hench, ImDADA and 10 guests