First - thank you Earle for getting me activated!!!
I've been using a 16-bit recorder for demos. A friend of mine has been recording a band on a 24-bit ADAT but I think he's saving the mixes as 16-bit. I was going to fool around with their stuff just to get some practice with Har-Bal, but now I'm wondering...
Is there any benefit to converting a 16-bit file to 24-bit before HarBalizing it? I realize that starting with a 24-bit file is best, but for my own stuff it's not an option (yet) and I haven't received my friend's stuff yet so I don't know how he's saving it. I can convert the 16-bit files to 24-bit but I don't know if it would be a good idea or a waste of time.
Thoughts? Thanx!
- J
16-bit vs. 24-bit?
Once the file is in 16 bit there is little benefit in converting it to 24 bit for processing in Har-Bal. The one possible benefit is that it will preclude Har-Bal adding a dither to a 16 bit track that has presumably already been dithered. That would be the only advantage. Now if you had a stereo 24 bit source then that would be a different story but it sounds like you don't.
Cheers,
Paavo.
Cheers,
Paavo.
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 7:18 pm
- Location: Arkansas
- Contact:
If your friend is using the HD24, then have him start to record his mixes to two spare tracks on that recorder.
You can setup that recorder as an FTP server and transfer the 24-bit files directly to another computer.
If you can get those files, then that would be ideal to work with for further processing.
You can setup that recorder as an FTP server and transfer the 24-bit files directly to another computer.
If you can get those files, then that would be ideal to work with for further processing.
Hmm. Well now I feel like an idiot.
My friend is using the old blackface tape system, which if I understand correctly is actually 16-bit. (He IS thinking about the HD24 though, I think, once he gets some money happening). I've been trying to get him into hard disk recording for awhile now...
Still, that question was annoying me anyway.
Now I have another - is ALL 16-bit audio dithered? Even if it was originally recorded in 16-bit to begin with?
One more - if I HarBalize a 16-bit source file, does HarBal dither it even more?
And finally - what exactly does dither noise sound like? Is it very noticeable?
Thanks for the responses! I'm learning!
- J
My friend is using the old blackface tape system, which if I understand correctly is actually 16-bit. (He IS thinking about the HD24 though, I think, once he gets some money happening). I've been trying to get him into hard disk recording for awhile now...
Still, that question was annoying me anyway.
Now I have another - is ALL 16-bit audio dithered? Even if it was originally recorded in 16-bit to begin with?
One more - if I HarBalize a 16-bit source file, does HarBal dither it even more?
And finally - what exactly does dither noise sound like? Is it very noticeable?
Thanks for the responses! I'm learning!
- J
To hear dither noise you need to turn up the volume to pretty loud levels. In my view, far louder than is comfortable or safe to listen to for prolonged periods.
I'd say that you can safely say that ALL 16 bit material is dithered and if it isn't it should be. Even if it was recorded in 16 bit originally, the ADC should have had a white noise dither applied to the input prior to quantisation. If you don't the quantisation noise ends up being correlated to the quantised sound when the sound is at low levels.
The way Har-bal is at the moment, it will dither the 16 bit file even more. This will raise the noise floor by about 3dB for the first step but less so if you happen to run it through again and again.
Plain triangular PDF dither is white noise and that is what it sounds like. Noiseshaped dithers are a different story and what each sounds like will depend on the noise shaping used.
Cheers,
Paavo.
I'd say that you can safely say that ALL 16 bit material is dithered and if it isn't it should be. Even if it was recorded in 16 bit originally, the ADC should have had a white noise dither applied to the input prior to quantisation. If you don't the quantisation noise ends up being correlated to the quantised sound when the sound is at low levels.
The way Har-bal is at the moment, it will dither the 16 bit file even more. This will raise the noise floor by about 3dB for the first step but less so if you happen to run it through again and again.
Plain triangular PDF dither is white noise and that is what it sounds like. Noiseshaped dithers are a different story and what each sounds like will depend on the noise shaping used.
Cheers,
Paavo.
Re: 16-bit vs. 24-bit?
http://www.tweakheadz.com/16_vs_24_bit_audio.htmSp00ky wrote:First - thank you Earle for getting me activated!!!
I've been using a 16-bit recorder for demos. A friend of mine has been recording a band on a 24-bit ADAT but I think he's saving the mixes as 16-bit. I was going to fool around with their stuff just to get some practice with Har-Bal, but now I'm wondering...
Is there any benefit to converting a 16-bit file to 24-bit before HarBalizing it? I realize that starting with a 24-bit file is best, but for my own stuff it's not an option (yet) and I haven't received my friend's stuff yet so I don't know how he's saving it. I can convert the 16-bit files to 24-bit but I don't know if it would be a good idea or a waste of time.
Thoughts? Thanx!
- J
Looking for that perfect tone
Paavo,HarBal wrote: This will raise the noise floor by about 3dB for the first step but less so if you happen to run it through again and again.
If using multiple passes of Har-Bal on the same project, because of the built-in dithering feature, is there a point at which some sort or subtle noise reduction should be used to clean up the noise floor buildup?
Tom