Is 16bit/48Khz good enough?
- Thread starter picur85
- Start date
C
CrabbMan
Guest
48K/hz is the sample rate for film, most music is 44.1KHz unless it is the music for a film. CDs can only handle 16bit, when you master your song, the bit depth should be compressed from 24 to 16, to give a perceived higher quality.
But basically, it all sounds fine.
But basically, it all sounds fine.
moses
hardliner
If you're into music production, a 20 years old 16bit/48kHz soundcard won't help you much (really, the card must be really old, nobody produces such soundcards since at least one decade.).
It's probably fine for simple playback purposes (watching a movie, listening to a CD, etc), but it's not for music production.
There are several reasons why this will be a serious show stopper. And it's not just about the low resolution (16 bit is waaaaay too low for music production, don't expect to record more than ~10 bit quality with such a card).
Buy a new, modern audio interface. They are very cheap. Read the manual.
Last edited:
Xabiton
Cupcake God
Why is 16 bit way too low for music production today? In an era where people go back and get older digital gear for production anyway I don't see how or why this could/would be bad sonically. My main question is does it work with modern operating systems? I didn't think it would be the worst thing ever.
moses
hardliner
16 bit is not practical for music production (don't get me wrong, IT IS fine for simple playback purposes). Even with a perfect full scale recording, the result won't be much more than ~12bit, and I don't even talk about processing (EQs, comps, etc). Add a half dozen processors and you're kissing 8 bit.
In case you're into lofi production geekyness, forget what I just said and have fun with all the quantization distortion and aliasing. But in case you're looking for at least basic quality (I mean the ability to record a signal half assed hi-fi quality), you'll find no way around a proper audio interface (we're talking about 50$, no the world).
Xabiton, the rule of thumb is that you lose a bit of information for every unused 6dB. So, a 16 bit recording done with a maximum level of -12dB effectively mean you're recording a 14bit signal. Do the same at -24dB and you have only 12bit left. Of course, reality is much more cruel, you can expect to end up with 1 or 2 less bits due to other technical issues.
It is simply impossible to record full 16 bits with 16bit converters. You MUST record at a higher precision to achieve full 16bit quality. That's also the reason why ALL professional AD converters since the last 20 years have at least 18 or 20 bits of resolution.
I'm surprised this is news for you.
Xabiton
Cupcake God
its not but I wanted to make sure that the OP knew why this was and that I realized what you were getting at before I say I disagree. I think 16 bit works for professional recordings if that is the kind of sound/coloration you are looking for. To me 16 bit is just a color at this point.
rayzer
Oldschool
specs wise i was thinking something along the lines of the Focusrite Scarlett which is kinda cheap (100-200 euro mark) but id like something more suited for use with a mixer.
my own setup works perfect atm but id like a higher quality soundcard, im only using a behringer uca202 now because i need it to get sound from the mixer and back.
Xabiton
Cupcake God
You may have found your solution then if the scarlett fits the bill try it out. I haven't heard anything negative about it but I have never used it.