TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- WOAH - Export Question (rsn)

WOAH - Export Question (rsn)

I'm comparing a two clips of a bar I exported, and for some reason the 24bit undithered 44khz clip sounds a bit better than the 16bit dithered 44khz. Am I imagining it? I see the waveforms take a different shape, but I never stopped to think how I export the wave the way I do.

What the heck is going on :S?

24 bit will sound a bit different. Because of the much finer volume gradations, things like reverb tails should decay more smoothly. Some mastering engineers will want you to provide a 24 bit version of your track (if you go for external mastering).

I'd say, if you have a powerful enough system to run in 24 bit, you may as well do it. The final 16 bit CD version will sound better for having all the elements/ effects at 24 bit beforehand. (Of course, there could be some 16 bit samples mixed in there too, which isn't a big issue. They won't benefit from running in 24 bit, but if they're good samples, they'll do just fine)

Overall though, don't get too hung up on bit rates (or sample rates, for that matter). The difference it will make to your sound is unbelievably small, compared with engineering and production skills. There are 16bit, 44.1kHz tracks which sound far superior to anything I've put together at higher bit or sample rates.

So, if you have the computing power, switch to 24 bit. But then forget about that side of things and focus on more important issues.

24bit sounds better than 16bit? Well...duh...

Most likely possibility is that it's clipped to shit, which is a lot more audible when exporting at a lower bit depth. Have you checked your levels?

quote:

Originally posted by palm ive started to export finished tracks in reason 24bit/48kHz.

don't export at 48khz unless you're putting it on dvd. cutting back to 44,100 for cd can be unpredictable.

quote:

Originally posted by echosystm don't export at 48khz unless you're putting it on dvd. cutting back to 44,100 for cd can be unpredictable.

And arn't sound systems 44khz configured?

quote:

Originally posted by echosystm don't export at 48khz unless you're putting it on dvd. cutting back to 44,100 for cd can be unpredictable.

I agree. I recommend 88.2kHz if one requires a higher samplerate, because it's exactly twice the rate of 44.1kHz so it converts better.
But I don't see the point for that either to be honest.
44.1kHz is fine.

i bounce 24/88.2 as well.

88,200 -> 44,100 is better than 48k or 96k to 44.1k, but you're still going to get unnecessary differences (loss) from what you expected. Not worth it IMO! Best to work in the format it will end up in.

actually exporting at any higher sampling frequency than 44,1kHz and downsamplig it to 44,1kHz will sound better than a straight export at 44,1kHz.

quote:

Originally posted by thecYrus actually exporting at any higher sampling frequency than 44,1kHz and downsamplig it to 44,1kHz will sound better than a straight export at 44,1kHz.

Are you quite sure about that?

yes, if you use a proper dithering algo

quote:

Originally posted by thecYrus yes, if you use a proper dithering algo

If you just export in 44.1khz wont your DAW already use a proper dithering algorithm to get to that?

Actually, thinking about it, I know a lot of sequencers work in 32bit bit-depth internally but Im not sure what samplerate they work in. I presume they do actually just work in 44.1khz unless you specify a higher samplerate in which case it works at 88.2khz internally for the mixdown, in which case you may be right, the whole mixing engine working in a higher samplerate will produce a better sounding output even after dithering down to 44.1khz...

It's not as much about dithering as it is about resampling and anti-alias filtering.

quote:

Originally posted by thecYrus actually exporting at any higher sampling frequency than 44,1kHz and downsamplig it to 44,1kHz will sound better than a straight export at 44,1kHz.

That makes as much sense as: 8/2 > 4

AFAIK it's not about whether it sounds better or not, it's about whether it sounds the same as you expected.

better is always relative but it will sound cleaner and less "digital" (reducing of alias).

some companies do this already internal in their plugins e.g UAD-plugins and any other stuff with integrated oversampling.

quote:

Originally posted by Eldritch That makes as much sense as: 8/2 > 4

probably for you. but have a read about anti-aliasing, nyquist, ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquis...ampling_theorem

quote:

Originally posted by thecYrus better is always relative but it will sound cleaner and less "digital" (reducing of alias). some companies do this already internal in their plugins e.g UAD-plugins and any other stuff with integrated oversampling.

ALL decent VSTs use oversampling in their oscillators, filters, effects, etc. There's no need to oversample the entire project.

quote:

Originally posted by thecYrus probably for you. but have a read about anti-aliasing, nyquist, ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquis...ampling_theorem

I'm already well aware of how it works, thank you.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.