quote:

Originally posted by studiobob good post this. some interesting opinions as well. let me put it like this. If i record a sample of someone singing and i record in 24 bit in cubase. for that sound to get from singer to cubase, its goes through a number of conversions 1 from singer to mic ie to electronic energy. the better mic i use, the better the quality. 2 mic down cable to preamp, where signal is boosted and maybe slightly processed. 3 preamp to soundcard where it under goes an AD conversion, but i've got a kickass soundcard with great convertors so i dont lose much in the translation from analog to digital. now if i did the same but with only 16 bit recording, i lose something. and if you play the recorded tracks back to back. you can tell. it loses something, its hard to say what exactly but its there. now if i convert said file to mp3, it again loses something. bit of top end disappears, bit of bass energy seems to disappear. regardless of what quality mp3 i convert too, both files get degraded in some way and the result is that the 24 bit mp3 file sounds better, is it audible?? not very compared to the 16 bit one. does it really matter in the end?? not a great deal... when your comparing samples and different rates the difference will be so small because your probably starting with digital samples/synths to begin with. your also trusting the manaufacturers that what they say is true, that files were rendered in 24 bit and the quality is great, as opposed to 16bit files converted up to 24 bit which will make fukall difference to the sound. stuff like the vengeance sound packs are so processed and limited that its nigh on irrelavent what depth they are due to the massively high volume and the audible distortion on them anyway. what i'm trying to say in a rather convoluted way is that the higher quality input you have the better. it will show its self in the finished product, maybe not a massive amount but it will be there. and for the OP who prefers digi to analog, you ever played on a moog or prophet keyboard? try it. i've had the pleasure of borrowing an old Prophet 5 keyboard which the native instruments pro53 was modelled on. nd its sounds massively better in everyway. try comparing the novation v station to a roland JP8000 which i understand is quite a good comparison. vstation only sounds better due to the truckload of effects and a rather tasty reverb, lose the effects and it sounds crap, and yes i own both and much prefer the sound of the JP. same goes for that bloody vanguard synth, awefull sounds apart from the effects which disguise it.. but who knows, posibly its the monitoring environment, ive got a pair of disgustingly good speakers, and please trust me when i say you can hear the differences!

did you try the test yet?

p.s. please keep the analog v digital to a minimum, we've been through that in other threads

___________________
hearthis
soundcloud
youtube

quote:

Originally posted by evo8 Stephen is there any chance you could make some 24 and 16bit wav loops from this sample pack you referred to in your first post, id like to have a listen to both just to if personally i can hear a difference.........

Gotta work tonight but I'll do multiple samples tomorrow. They will be from sample packs.

quote:

Originally posted by studiobob now if i did the same but with only 16 bit recording, i lose something. and if you play the recorded tracks back to back. you can tell. it loses something, its hard to say what exactly but its there. now if i convert said file to mp3, it again loses something. bit of top end disappears, bit of bass energy seems to disappear. regardless of what quality mp3 i convert too, both files get degraded in some way and the result is that the 24 bit mp3 file sounds better, is it audible?? not very compared to the 16 bit one. does it really matter in the end?? not a great deal...

Good to hear. For a minute I thought I might be hearing audible hallucinations. Glad to see that other people are speaking.

I don't know - When mastering, 24bit sounds clearly better on the track. That is assuming they just didn't export their project in 24 or 32bit and pretty much did everything with 16 bit samples.

no, i havent tried the test. i dont feel i need to. i've been blessed with a stupidly good monitoring system and if i couldnt tell the difference between 2 types of file be it wav or mp3 or whatever then i probably need to retire early!

___________________
www.soundcloud.com/iainsanderson

quote:

Originally posted by evo8 did you try the test yet? p.s. please keep the analog v digital to a minimum, we've been through that in other threads

sorry was just making a point between a similar comparison. i'll let it lie. i will just say that those who tend to knock analog synths and hardware comps/eqs have probably never used any good ones... or then again it may just be down to personal taste

___________________
www.soundcloud.com/iainsanderson

quote:

Originally posted by studiobob no, i havent tried the test. i dont feel i need to. i've been blessed with a stupidly good monitoring system and if i couldnt tell the difference between 2 types of file be it wav or mp3 or whatever then i probably need to retire early!

heeeeeyyyyyy come on, what you have got to lose but your internet reputation

___________________
hearthis
soundcloud
youtube

quote:

Originally posted by DjStephenWiley Gotta work tonight but I'll do multiple samples tomorrow. They will be from sample packs.

appreciate that mate

___________________
hearthis
soundcloud
youtube

quote:

Originally posted by DjStephenWiley Hmmm - Care to refresh my memory on some of the reasons people love true analog?

First of all, I don't really see how that's relevant to the issue of bit depths.

Second, it's generally misleading to say that "people" love "true analog". Some people love specific analog sounds, and generally what they love is the unique sound of a particular instrument like a minimoog, or a particular amplifier. That's not the same as saying that a statistically significant majority of people prefer any analog sound to any digital sound, and if anyone tried to say that, even just about himself, I'd be very skeptical and propose a blind test to prove it.

Last but not least, in the specific case of analog tube amps, which is really the only "true analog" sound in the amp world (anything with a transistor is solid-state and therefore digital), the main reason many people prefer that is because tubes produce warm-sounding second-order distortion as opposed to the gritty-sounding third-order distortion and intermodulation distortion found in overdriven digital amps.

When it comes to analog "instruments", it's generally the filters and specifically the particular components (capacitors, inductors) used to make them that produce that instrument's characteristic sound. The fact that the circuit is analog is mostly incidental; if you yanked out some of those big capacitors and replaced them with completely different caps having the same capacitance, you would not get exactly the same sound. What you're actually hearing and what most people refer to as "warmth" or "colour" is a different kind of distortion due to nonlinearities in the components; digital systems have a hard time recreating those without elaborate algorithms and never produce these artifacts "accidentally".

Back on topic, it's funny that you're now agreeing with bob, who said pretty much the same thing I did. Higher-fidelity inputs will produce a higher-fidelity end result; however, if you have to lower the fidelity at the very end (i.e. to make an MP3), then it is better to do it in the minimum possible number of discrete stages in order to avoid compounding the loss.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by Pjotr G Well, this makes sense. When you convert down to 16 bit, dithering is applied. Apperently its artifacts have a pleasing effect on you. A 32 bit sample converted to 16 bits, however, has no more than 16 bits of dynamic depth. Which raises the question, is it possible to apply "converting artifacts" to 16 bit recordings, to make them sound more pleasing to you, without ever using a 32 bit source.... Note: something similar was going on with wav/mp3 comparisons. In blind tests, a fair amount of people preferred the mp3 sound over the wav. It is not a matter of objective quality, but of subjective enjoyment of certain processing techniques applied to a sound as part of the converting process. Can you apply those techniques on a wav without actually converting to mp3....

Isn't it also just possible that those people involved in the study had no fuckin idea what they were listening for/to and therefore just gave bullshit answers to the questions asked and hence the strange result?

I do understand what you're getting at anyway, but my point still requires consideration

quote:

Originally posted by daveth Isn't it also just possible that those people involved in the study had no fuckin idea what they were listening for/to and therefore just gave bullshit answers to the questions asked and hence the strange result?

No, cause then the result would be 50/50. I suppose they tested a sufficient amount of individuals for the uncertainty factor to not have any effect..

quote:

Originally posted by daveth Isn't it also just possible that those people involved in the study had no fuckin idea what they were listening for/to and therefore just gave bullshit answers to the questions asked and hence the strange result? I do understand what you're getting at anyway, but my point still requires consideration

Of course they didn't know what to listen for, that's the point. Regular people don't care that flangy hihats are an artifact of mp3's. The study was not about discernable differences between wav and mp3. It was about what was more PLEASING to listen to. Like the OP, these people don't care about tech specs, they care about listening pleasure.

___________________
All rhythm evolves around a kick...