Quantcast
Question to the pros, about the best way to get from 24 bit to 16 bit... - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Question to the pros, about the best way to get from 24 bit to 16 bit...
Old 11th September 2012
  #1
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Question to the pros, about the best way to get from 24 bit to 16 bit...

Hi guys, I have this question to the pros out there who might know what i'm talking about.

I have noticed with horror that the sound that I get within my DAW , working at 24 bit 48000Hz ... is way different from result I get when I render the track to 16 bit 44.1 Khz, using Oxford limiter. Mind you when the limiter in on, and I listen to the track IN THE DAW , all is perfect and clear and defined ... the problems happen when I render the track (there is no gain reduction happening as I don't like limiting my tracks and Yes I have lowered the output by 1dB).

The rendered 16 bit 44.1Khz track lacks definition, the details are blurred , some attacky sounds became ugly, smeared and not recognizable.



So I tried to render the track with no dither , no oxford limiter , and I kept it at 48Khz and 24 bit.

The track sounded exactly how it sounded in my DAW ... all the information and details were present.




My question is, what is the best tool that professional mastering engineers use to get from a 24 bit 48Khz project to a 16 bit 44.1 Khz version, while keeping all the details, clarity , punch and micro-details of the track ??



Thank you guys in advance for your help, I would be extremely grateful if anyone could help me with this issue.
Old 11th September 2012
  #2
ORC
Gear Addict
 
ORC's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Sample rate convert from 48K to 44.1k without your limiter. Next render the 24 bit 44.1k file through your limiter while dithering to 16 bit. That's it.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #3
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ORC ➡️
Sample rate convert from 48K to 44.1k without your limiter. Next render the 24 bit 44.1k file through your limiter while dithering to 16 bit. That's it.
Do you mean that I should change the sampling rate of the PROJECT in the DAW to 44.1K ??? When I do this it changes the sound of my mix :S
Old 11th September 2012
  #4
Lives for gear
 
huejahfink's Avatar
 
Verified Member
🎧 10 years
If you are not happy with the DAW resampling, export at 24/48 and then use an external algorithm for resampling such as Izotope SRC or SOX etc.
Some of the DAW resamplers are not so good.

I definitely recommend both the Izotope SRC and their dither.

Izotope RX2 Advanced could be perfect since in there you can perform resampling, limiting (using your normal plugin) and dithering to final format all from the same program.
Old 11th September 2012
  #5
Lives for gear
 
lowland's Avatar
 
Verified Member
16 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Sample Manager uses the iZotope sample rate conversion algorithm, is versatile and relatively inexpensive.

Audiofile Engineering - Sample Manager
Old 11th September 2012
  #6
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Thanks a lot for your input guys!!!! I will look for those on the spot

By the way if price is not a problem, what is the BEST OF THE BEST(simply the best and most advanced) program out there that can do the job(resampling and dithering) please ??
Old 11th September 2012
  #7
Lives for gear
 
lowland's Avatar
 
Verified Member
16 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Speaking about sample rate conversion (others will no doubt comment on dither) 'best' isn't easy to quantify because much of this stuff is down to personal preference, and also the available technologies have advanced quite a bit in recent years.

I use Sample Manager because it doesn't get me bogged down tweaking settings and sounds very good to my ears. If you want a more adjustable version of the same algorithm, iZotope RX2 Advanced has the bells and whistles and is a fine denoising and repitching package to boot - with a price to match. I have RX2 Advanced, but still generally use Sample Manager for SRC, sometimes workflow considerations outweigh others.
iZotope RX - Complete Audio Restoration: Declipping, Declicker, Hum Removal, Denoiser, Spectral Repair, Restore, Remaster, Download

Another SRC solution which I haven't heard but others would put in your 'best of the best' category is Weiss Saracon, and as you might expect from the company it's not cheap.
Weiss :: SARACON

Finally, if you haven't already seen it, check out
SRC Comparisons
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #8
Lives for gear
 
echoRausch's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by alecsribet ➡️
Do you mean that I should change the sampling rate of the PROJECT in the DAW to 44.1K ??? When I do this it changes the sound of my mix :S
You should change the sampling rate of the DAW to 44,1 kHz, but you HAVE TO EXAMINE WHY it sounds different.

It should sound way better to work in 44,1 but have no need to convert the sampling rate afterwards.

What is your host (ableton?) and what is your DAW (PC/Mac/soundcard)?
Old 11th September 2012
  #9
Gear Addict
 
T.V. Eye's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
This sounds weird to me. Changing the sampling rate in a given 48kHz project to 44,1kHz will change the playback speed, wouldn´t it?
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #10
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowland ➡️
Speaking about sample rate conversion (others will no doubt comment on dither) 'best' isn't easy to quantify because much of this stuff is down to personal preference, and also the available technologies have advanced quite a bit in recent years.

I use Sample Manager because it doesn't get me bogged down tweaking settings and sounds very good to my ears. If you want a more adjustable version of the same algorithm, iZotope RX2 Advanced has the bells and whistles and is a fine denoising and repitching package to boot - with a price to match. I have RX2 Advanced, but still generally use Sample Manager for SRC, sometimes workflow considerations outweigh others.
iZotope RX - Complete Audio Restoration: Declipping, Declicker, Hum Removal, Denoiser, Spectral Repair, Restore, Remaster, Download

Another SRC solution which I haven't heard but others would put in your 'best of the best' category is Weiss Saracon, and as you might expect from the company it's not cheap.
Weiss :: SARACON

Finally, if you haven't already seen it, check out
SRC Comparisons
Thanks a lot for your time and quality input man!!! I will look those up right nowwww
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #11
Lives for gear
 
echoRausch's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.V. Eye ➡️
This sounds weird to me. Changing the sampling rate in a given 48kHz project to 44,1kHz will change the playback speed, wouldn´t it?
Depends on the kind of project, used host software... Maybe it's not the solution for that particular project but for further ones. Start working in 44.1 and avoid conversion problems in the future.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #12
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by echoRausch ➡️
You should change the sampling rate of the DAW to 44,1 kHz, but you HAVE TO EXAMINE WHY it sounds different.

It should sound way better to work in 44,1 but have no need to convert the sampling rate afterwards.

What is your host (ableton?) and what is your DAW (PC/Mac/soundcard)?
At higher sampling rates the sound is cleaner , more defined(I can say beautiful) and focused.

When I work on a 88.2K or 48K and try to get to 44.1 K .... it becomes different from the mix that I have crafted at the higher rates.

Long time ago I couldn't make the difference between 48K and 44.1K ... but now that I work on 48K all the time , I think it changed the way my ears hear things(the way some plugins sound and some vst instruments sound is very different when using those different sampling rates).

I can guarantee that 1 year back I wouldn't be able to hear the down-sampling or dithering ****ty artefacts, but now they sound obvious.

Some people claim that those differences are just overkill ... the thing is ...they just cannot hear it... but those differences exist.

I use Ableton, PC , Lavry DA11 as my DAC.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #13
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by echoRausch ➡️
Depends on the kind of project, used host software... Maybe it's not the solution for that particular project but for further ones. Start working in 44.1 and avoid conversion problems in the future.
It's like telling me to drive a Toyota, after spending so much time driving a BMW...

Professionals know how to downsample and lower the number of bits with minimum problems, cause they have the proper tools. That's why I wanted to have an opinion from them and know about those tools :D.


I tasted the pleasure of working on higher rates , I don't wanna go back lol
Old 11th September 2012
  #14
Lives for gear
 
echoRausch's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Higher rates of 96/88.2 are worth checking with your setup.

The difference between 48 and 44.1 will be fairly negligible. The losses of the conversion of 48 to 44.1 are more significant.

So it's easier and better to start working in 44.1 and save the conversion instead of working in 48k and do a conversion to 44.1 afterwards.
Old 11th September 2012
  #15
Lives for gear
 
echoRausch's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Maybe the difference you hear between 48/44.1 is a particular issue of ableton. I often heard people say ableton sounds better at 48k (thats why I asked for it). But that seems to be specific issue of this host. In reality it will be really really hard to hear any difference between 16/44.1 or 16/48k.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #16
Lives for gear
 
echoRausch's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by alecsribet ➡️
I can guarantee that 1 year back I wouldn't be able to hear the down-sampling or dithering ****ty artefacts, but now they sound obvious.
Start working @44.1 would cause no downsampling.

Dithering is added @48k as well as @44.1 when converting to 16 bit.
Old 11th September 2012
  #17
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Judging by the graphics, FinalCD seems to be the best converter.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #18
Lives for gear
 
dcollins's Avatar
 
Verified Member
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
Have you tried noise shaping instead of dither?
It's not an either/or proposition.

Noise-shaping is used with d*ther in order to make the added noise energy less audible.

Personally I never use it and just stick with flat or HPDF.


DC
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #19
Lives for gear
 
dcollins's Avatar
 
Verified Member
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by scalawag ➡️
Judging by the graphics, FinalCD seems to be the best converter.
I'd never looked at that one before, the results are essentially perfect.


DC
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #20
Lives for gear
 
Verified Member
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ORC ➡️
Sample rate convert from 48K to 44.1k without your limiter. Next render the 24 bit 44.1k file through your limiter while dithering to 16 bit. That's it.
I don't understand why this is a better route? I limit first and sample rate convert second on every project I do and there is no issue.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #21
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins ➡️
I'd never looked at that one before, the results are essentially perfect.


DC
True!! I'm trying to run it on Windows 7 with no success. FinalCD is pretty old (2005). I'll try on my Windows XP instead...
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #22
Lives for gear
 
hmiller's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruairi ➡️
I don't understand why this is a better route? I limit first and sample rate convert second on every project I do and there is no issue.
I agree. You should always limit at the higher sample rate and then convert.
Old 11th September 2012
  #23
Lives for gear
 
Alexey Lukin's Avatar
 
Verified Member
🎧 10 years
Limiting at a higher sampling rate does not guarantee you from slightly clipping the signal during your SRC.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #24
Lives for gear
 
hmiller's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexey Lukin ➡️
Limiting at a higher sampling rate does not guarantee you from slightly clipping the signal during your SRC.
Right, it's about the performance of the limiter.
Old 11th September 2012
  #25
Lives for gear
 
Verified Member
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Exactly as Huntley and Alexey says. I capture at 2xFS because digital my digital limiter and any post capture processing sounds better, I also have a "hi res" capture for future use.

I allow about 0.7dB ceiling on my limiter and that is usually enough to prevent overs when using the iZotope SRC.

I'm hoping to move to a model of live SRC soon.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #26
Lives for gear
 
hmiller's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruairi ➡️

...I'm hoping to move to a model of live SRC soon.
Same here. I just need a TC 6000 first so I can do digital magic pre SRC.
Old 12th September 2012
  #27
Lives for gear
 
Plush's Avatar
 
Verified Member
5 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
The fact of the matter is that there should be very little sound difference in your sample rate converted and dithered file when compared to the full fidelity file. Properly done the 16 bit file should play like it has the detail of a 19-20 bit source.

To do this depends on having a good sample rate converter and a good dither generator. Always sample rate convert first and then dither with triangular noise shaping.

Yes, you may hear it differently at 16 bit, but it should still be VERY good if your master was very good.

Not all daws process the music without changing it.
Old 12th September 2012 | Show parent
  #28
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plush ➡️
The fact of the matter is that there should be very little sound difference in your sample rate converted and dithered file when compared to the full fidelity file. Properly done the 16 bit file should play like it has the detail of a 19-20 bit source.

To do this depends on having a good sample rate converter and a good dither generator. Always sample rate convert first and then dither with triangular noise shaping.

Yes, you may hear it differently at 16 bit, but it should still be VERY good if your master was very good.

Not all daws process the music without changing it.
Thanks for your posts guys but could you please help me with regards to my problem ??

What plugins do the best limiting(most transparent limiting), dithering that still keeps all my mix details intact and which is the best SRC for the job ????

I mean for the SRC , LOWLAND told me that it was between Izotope and Weiss...So I think I got the solution to this.

But what about the rest (Best dithering and limiting) ??


Mind you , there is almost no(I think none) gain reduction on my limiter, I make sure that I fix everything in the mix , cause I don't like what limiters do to my mix. I just use the limiting as a protection, in case some slight peak happens.
Old 12th September 2012
  #29
Lives for gear
 
Verified Member
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
The best way to choose a limiter is to audition several and choose one you like. I don't think there is as much variation in quality as many would have you believe, I hear a lot of different not better or worse.

First limit with your limiter of choice, then sample rate convert then dither.

Sample Manager uses the iZotope SRC and dither and sounds great for $80.
Old 12th September 2012 | Show parent
  #30
Lives for gear
 
greggybud's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
[QUOTE=Ruairi;8253204] I don't think there is as much variation in quality as many would have you believe, I hear a lot of different not better or worse./QUOTE]

Very well said. I find many limiter shootouts on forums, especially here laughable.

You get to a degree where "better" is meaningless. Some people like chocolate others strawberry. Some even like safe vanilla. Whats your favorite?

IMO best to focus on other issues that are usually more important, especially if the majority of gain in your chain comes before the signal even hits the limiter.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 217 views: 47563
Avatar for wavemechanic.net
wavemechanic.net 8th November 2016
replies: 56 views: 17340
Avatar for Alexey Lukin
Alexey Lukin 3rd March 2021
replies: 57 views: 15742
Avatar for Alexey Lukin
Alexey Lukin 8th December 2011
replies: 75 views: 17994
Avatar for Robb Robinson
Robb Robinson 6th June 2021
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump