64-bit Mix Engine Question

Page: 12 > Showing page 1 of 2
Author
SonicExplorer
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 775
  • Joined: 2004/02/26 16:44:40
  • Status: offline
2017/07/04 19:28:03 (permalink)

64-bit Mix Engine Question

Hi Guys,

I'm back working on some old classic 80's metal projects in S5 and S6 and am wondering something...  Is the 64-bit mix engine going to be an improvement over what I'm hearing when playing back during real-time mixing with the 64-bit engine check-box unchecked?  Asked another way, I assume I'm hearing 32-bit during playback and am not experiencing the benefits of the 64-bit mix engine, is that right?  I'm asking because I was never able to get the 64-bit mix engine to engage due to a DirectXer limitation with the Synth Rack.  I'd need to (re)install Drums Superior 1.x as a native VST, and don't want to risk doing that on these old, fragile systems unless I thought the benefit may be worth it in order to engage the 64-bit mix engine.
 
I'm hoping to achieve a bit more clarity & smoothness in general, and less digital harshness in the upper-mid/high frequencies.  I vaguely recall the 64-bit mix engine doing exactly that but it was so long ago when I tested it on these old systems I can't recall for sure.
 
Sonic
 
Update: I wonder what would happen if I left DFHS registered in DirectXer and just installed DFHS as a VST directly in Sonar as well. And then only use that native VST registered inside Sonar so I should in theory be able to turn ont he 64-bit mix engine.
post edited by SonicExplorer - 2017/07/05 06:55:59
#1

32 Replies Related Threads

    Sidroe
    Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1954
    • Joined: 2010/11/10 18:59:43
    • Location: Macon,Georgia
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 15:13:08 (permalink)
    I am confused. You didn't say if you are working in 32 bit or 64 bit Sonar! If you are working in 32 bit, the old sales pitch from Cake said that you would have some benefits with the 64 bit engine checked. If I remember correctly, the noticeable differences would be in the reverb tails being smoother, delay trails being smoother and clearer, but no real discernable difference in the core 32 bit audio.
    Since I switched to 64 bit, I can't even get some of my projects to load in 32 because I'm using past the 32 bit RAM limit. Plug in instruments have gotten bigger these days! Even drum programs have become huge with the advent of 64 bit.
    I hope that I am remembering correctly and that helps you out.

    Sonar Platinum, Sonar X3e, Sonar X2a , Sonar X1 Expanded and 8.5.3 (32 and 64 bit), Windows 10 on a Toshiba P75-A7200 Laptop with i7 @ 2.4 quad and 8 gigs of RAM and secondary WD 1 Tb drive, Windows 10 desktop, Asus i5 @ 3.2 quad, 12 gigs RAM, 1 Tb drive, 1 500 gig drive, MOTU 24io, 2 Roland Studio Captures, Saffire 6 USB for laptop, Soundtracs Topaz Project 8 mixer, Alesis Monitor 2s, Event BAS 20/20s, Roland Micro-Monitor BA-8s, and 45 years worth of collecting FX, Mics, Amps, Guitars, and Keyboards!
    #2
    ptheisen
    Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 173
    • Joined: 2008/12/15 21:55:03
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 15:48:46 (permalink)
    The 64 bit mix engine refers only to the level of mathematical precision used when doing the calculations required for mixing the audio. When turned on, Sonar uses 64 bit mathematical precision; when turned off, it uses 32 bit mathematical precision. In most circumstances, there would be no audible difference because 32 bit precision is "plenty good enough" for this task. So it is not likely going to be worth it to go to any significant effort to make the 64 bit mix engine work if you are encountering issues with it turned on.
     
    This setting is independent from the difference between 32 and 64 bit operating systems, which impacts the amount of accessible RAM. It is also independent from the bit depth of the recorded/generated audio. All three of these things use a number of bits to measure them, which can be confusing and make them seem similar, but they are not the same thing. The mix engine can be set to use either 32 or 64 bits regardless of the operating system or the bit depth of the recorded/generated audio.
    #3
    Bristol_Jonesey
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 16775
    • Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
    • Location: Bristol, UK
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 15:59:24 (permalink)
    SonicExplorer
    Asked another way, I assume I'm hearing 32-bit during playback and am not experiencing the benefits of the 64-bit mix engine, is that right? 

     
    Not really.
     
    When playing back what you hear is dictated by your interface, the majority of which operate at 24 bit and in the real world, this can mean the effective bit depth is around 20
     

    CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughout
    Custom built i7 3930, 32Gb RAM, 2 x 1Tb Internal HDD, 1 x 1TB system SSD (Win 7), 1 x 500Gb system SSD (Win 10), 2 x 1Tb External HDD's, Dual boot Win 7 & Win 10 64 Bit, Saffire Pro 26, ISA One, Adam P11A,
    #4
    SonicExplorer
    Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 775
    • Joined: 2004/02/26 16:44:40
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 17:49:27 (permalink)
    Thanks guys.  I'm using a 32 bit platform, they are old W2K and XP boxes.

    I understand the 32 and 64 bit platforms as being a different subject than the 64-bit mix engine, no confusion there.
     
    After pondering this further, I *think* "mix engine" may not be a good term?  Audio engine maybe is better? In that context, I would be hearing the 32 bit engine if the selection is unchecked, and 64 bit otherwise. So maybe that answers my own question??
     
    As for a difference in audio quality, I could have sworn when I ran preliminary A/B mix tests when S5 was first released that I could hear a difference in clarity and smoothness.  Just an overall better sounding result with the 64-bit mix engine. I want to say the result was smoother and punchier, just overall higher-end professional sounding.  It was subtle but if you are a picky person it was definitely noticeable, I could hear it using just an RME and BAS 20/20 monitors. But I simply can't recall back that far to be honest.
     
    I wonder what will happen if I try to install DFHS in Sonar's VST wrapper/manager (or whatever it is called) while leaving things currently registered in DirectXer as well?   Wonder if it will blow something up in a bad way.  As long as I don't try enabling both in the synth rack at the same time?  Any thoughts or guesses??
    post edited by SonicExplorer - 2017/07/05 18:16:30
    #5
    drewfx1
    Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 6585
    • Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 18:38:14 (permalink)
    SonicExplorer
     
    As for a difference in audio quality, I could have sworn when I ran preliminary A/B tests when S5 was first released that I could hear more clarity and smoothness.  Just an overall better sounding result with the 64-bit mix engine. I want to say the result was smoother and punchier, just overall higher-end professional sounding.  It was subtle but if you are a picky person it was definitely noticeable. But I simply can't recall back that far to be honest.
     



    If you have a single track that started in the analog domain (including sample libraries!), it's inherent noise will absolutely bury the level at which 32 bit calculation errors start to appear. 
     
    Since in this case the errors do not accumulate over time and do not accumulate rapidly, there are simply not enough calculations done on a single track in the mix engine* to raise the error level enough to be anywhere close to the noise already in the tracks, much less audible.
     
    And obviously adding multiple tracks like this together will not make calculation errors add faster than the noise from the individual tracks.
     
    In fact most of the 32 bit calculation errors won't even make it into 24 bit audio output, much less be above the noise floor due to other causes, much less be audible.
     
    You will find people who believe they hear a difference, but inevitably they are not using a reliable method of comparison and what they claim to hear and the circumstances where they claim to hear it simply do not match what the calculation errors would sound like if they were audible.
     
     
    * there are circumstances where 64 bit calculations are necessary due to the extreme number of calculations done, but this is not one of them.

     In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
    #6
    SonicExplorer
    Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 775
    • Joined: 2004/02/26 16:44:40
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 19:11:20 (permalink)
    Some of that admittedly went over my head a bit.  Other than to say I got the general message as being I won't hear a difference to speak of.   If it helps clarify my situation any, I'm using tracks originally recorded at 24 bit 44.1KHz.  Mixing down to 32 bit and then mastering down to 16.   DFHS (samples) for drums, analog bass, quasi-analog guitars (often Kemper) and vocals.  Hard rock style.
     
    Sonic
     
     
    #7
    bitflipper
    01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
    • Total Posts : 26036
    • Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
    • Location: Everett, WA USA
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 19:22:32 (permalink)
    SonicExplorer
    After pondering this further, I *think* "mix engine" may not be a good term?  Audio engine maybe is better? In that context, I would be hearing the 32 bit engine if the selection is unchecked, and 64 bit otherwise. 

    Actually "mix engine" is the better term, because word length only comes into play when mixing two or more tracks. If you're just playing back a single track with no modification, then there is no benefit to greater mathematical precision. It's only when modifying the audio by summing tracks or using a multiplier to alter their levels (e.g. faders, compressors, EQ) that those calculations can affect the outcome.
     
    Mathematically, it's actually quite similar to how your property taxes and bank interests are calculated: when real dollar amounts are multiplied by some rate multiplier, the results are stored in imaginary currency (millicents, or thousandths of a cent). These are intermediate values that will never appear on a tax bill or bank statement. That extra precision reduces the overall rounding error, so that when those numbers are ultimately expressed in real currency the cumulative error will be less than a penny.
     
    32- or 64-bit calculations do that for audio, making errors insignificant to the final result. As noted above, by the time it gets to your audio interface it's essentially 20- or 16-bit resolution anyway. Given that even 32-bit audio is overkill, there isn't even a compelling reason to use the 64-bit engine. You will not hear the difference, any more than your bank statement would be different if the bank used microcents instead of millicents.
     
     


    All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. 

    My Stuff
    #8
    azslow3
    Max Output Level: -42.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3297
    • Joined: 2012/06/22 19:27:51
    • Location: Germany
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 19:41:02 (permalink)
    There are many good explanations in the internet why 16bit/44.1kHz  (when down-sampled correctly) is sufficient for music. But I have seen only one good scientific and statistically correct explanation why "audiophiles" can distinguish between 24/96 and correctly produced from it 16/44 (so yes, that is possible, but...): if some part of analog equipment really can output hi settings, but that hit the limit of another analog equipment in the chain, "hi quality" signal produce more distortion then "normal" quality signal. Since the difference is "subtle", the effect is wide frequencies noise like and psychologically people do not expect worse result from "better" material, that is claimed to be "good difference". Also noise is actively used to change the sound, to imitate "warmth" (old analog effects) and "smooth" (dithering). So distortion triggered noise can easily be perceived as intentional improvement.
     
    It is relatively easy to calculate from dB level changes in particular project what "error" can come out when using 32bit instead of 64bit. It should be like (gain -30)->(track +40)->(bus - 30)->....->(master +30) to come under 24. Probably for reverb route (with low level sends, convolutions, heavy compressions and other tricky algos) such signal "downgrade" is practically possible to achieve. But I think perceptible difference (as I wrote before, the direction is unclear) with hi probability comes from:
    * bugs in software (32/64bit code is at least partially different, at least converted to processor code)
    * completely different routes in software (f.e. recent discussion why Sonar -> 24bit WAV -> 24bit FLAC can be significantly different from Sonar -> 24bit FLAC).

    Sonar 8LE -> Platinum infinity, REAPER, Windows 10 pro
    GA-EP35-DS3L, E7500, 4GB, GTX 1050 Ti, 2x500GB
    RME Babyface Pro (M-Audio Audiophile Firewire/410, VS-20), Kawai CN43, TD-11, Roland A500S, Akai MPK Mini, Keystation Pro, etc.
    www.azslow.com - Control Surface Integration Platform for SONAR, ReaCWP, AOSC and other accessibility tools
    #9
    SonicExplorer
    Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 775
    • Joined: 2004/02/26 16:44:40
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 20:54:12 (permalink)
    Hmmm...  I did a lot of reading on the whole 32 vs. 64 bit mix engine last night and still came away not knowing what to believe.  On paper it seems not realistic to hear a difference in most scenarios, but in practice some people claim to hear it.  
     
    If enough things are rounded, eventually the decimals can add to pennies which can add to dollars, it all depends on how you group and round, and how many times that transpires.  Being an old school analog relic I just don't know enough about the inner workings of this digital stuff.
     
    And not to derail my own thread, but I also read a comment last night that said XP sounds better than W2K.  Which really left me scratching my head as I was unaware one OS version from another by itself could change the quality of sound.  Huh??
    #10
    interpolated
    Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 830
    • Joined: 2015/03/26 17:34:58
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 21:11:11 (permalink)
    Psycho-acoustics is the threshold of the people who make money from all the folklore that goes around technology circles. It's the output of the hardware that makes your sound, your ears and where that sound is reflecting (or not as the case may be).
     
    Anyway.....
     
    Most sound we are likely to hear is relative to 20-bit (120dB SPL).

    I have computer stuff.
     
    https://soundcloud.com/sigmadelta
    #11
    Sycraft
    Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 871
    • Joined: 2012/05/04 21:06:10
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 21:16:42 (permalink)
    SonicExplorer
    Hmmm...  I did a lot of reading on the whole 32 vs. 64 bit mix engine last night and still came away not knowing what to believe.  On paper it seems not realistic to hear a difference in most scenarios, but in practice some people claim to hear it.

     
    In some practice people claim to hear the differences in cables, even though we can prove in blind testing they can't (and prove they are the same on a 'scope). People claim all kinds of stuff they can't substantiate. They want to hear a difference, so they do. 
     
    If enough things are rounded, eventually the decimals can add to pennies which can add to dollars, it all depends on how you group and round, and how many times that transpires.  Being an old school analog relic I just don't know enough about the inner workings of this digital stuff.

     
    That is the reason for having something like a 64-bit engine: Insurance against rounding. With 32-bit, rounding errors will occur. 32-bit FP is actuall 8-bits exponent, 24-bits significand. That means it has 24-bits of precision over a range of 8-bits, more or less. So when working at normal audio levels, assuming 24-bit input and output, you do get minor rounding errors. However they are going to be on the order or 1, maybe 2-bit at most in all likelihood. So you don't worry about it. Even the best DACs don't resolve more than maybe 21-22bits of signal and other kinds of noise will be WAY higher.
     
    However in theory, enough operations, particularly ones that involve things like multiplication or division in sequence, could increase the rounding error. It doesn't really happen in practice, but it could in theory. Well we can easily prevent that just by going double precision. Now we have an 11-bit fraction and 53-bit of significand. That means we have so much precision we will never have any rounding error ever reach the 24-bit output signal, even in edge cases. Since modern processors kill at double precision performance, no real reason not to use it.
     
    If you want to see a case where it does matter, look at graphics. Most monitors and video formats are 8-bits per channel output. However you need to do processing in 32-bits per channel (floating point) if you want truly smooth colour gradients. Do it in 16-bit half precision and you can see errors sometimes.
     
    And not to derail my own thread, but I also read a comment last night that said XP sounds better than W2K.  Which really left me scratching my head as I was unaware one OS version from another by itself could change the quality of sound.  Huh??

     
    For sound going through the OS layer? Sure. Remember that unless you use something like ASIO to talk straight to the soundcard, the OS is modifying the sound. It runs it through a mixer and resampling engine to allow for more than one program to play sound at once. Sometimes does other stuff too. How good or bad it does that can vary. In general newer OSes are better than older ones since there is more CPU power these days so they use better algorithms.
    #12
    SonicExplorer
    Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 775
    • Joined: 2004/02/26 16:44:40
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 21:29:28 (permalink)
    Sycraft
    SonicExplorer
     
    And not to derail my own thread, but I also read a comment last night that said XP sounds better than W2K.  Which really left me scratching my head as I was unaware one OS version from another by itself could change the quality of sound.  Huh??

     
    For sound going through the OS layer? Sure. Remember that unless you use something like ASIO to talk straight to the soundcard, the OS is modifying the sound. It runs it through a mixer and resampling engine to allow for more than one program to play sound at once. Sometimes does other stuff too. How good or bad it does that can vary. In general newer OSes are better than older ones since there is more CPU power these days so they use better algorithms.




    Thanks to everybody so far for the responses.
     
    I'm using WDM drivers that I thought, along with RME FF and Sonar, effectively bypassed the OS layers to go straight to hardware.  If that's not the case then maybe this is why I seem to have some harshness/clarity issues going on (for lack of better description).  Hmmm...
    #13
    bitflipper
    01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
    • Total Posts : 26036
    • Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
    • Location: Everett, WA USA
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 21:37:42 (permalink)
    Nothing really goes "straight to the hardware", but it doesn't matter. Extra layers add to overall latency, but shouldn't affect harshness or clarity. Wish I could tell you what your problem really is, but all I can say is that whatever issues you're experiencing they can't be ascribed to the drivers or the O/S. 


    All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. 

    My Stuff
    #14
    SonicExplorer
    Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 775
    • Joined: 2004/02/26 16:44:40
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 21:57:54 (permalink)
    Ok, thanks, OS not likely impacting sound quality.
     
    I could swear however I recall hearing a subtle but noticeable and important (to me) difference between 32 and 64 bit mix engine.  I also now vaguely recall making two mixes and comparing them.  Will check around and see if I can find those files....will post back if I discover anything definitive....
     
    Sonic
    #15
    interpolated
    Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 830
    • Joined: 2015/03/26 17:34:58
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/05 23:21:51 (permalink)
    The actual sound changed in Windows 2000 to XP which was it became WASAPI which means it operates at a different application level, giving you direct access to the hardware before it passes information through the application layer. Something Technet-ish and geeky anyway.
     

    I have computer stuff.
     
    https://soundcloud.com/sigmadelta
    #16
    drewfx1
    Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 6585
    • Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/06 00:37:26 (permalink)
    SonicExplorer
    Ok, thanks, OS not likely impacting sound quality.
     
    I could swear however I recall hearing a subtle but noticeable and important (to me) difference between 32 and 64 bit mix engine.  I also now vaguely recall making two mixes and comparing them.  Will check around and see if I can find those files....will post back if I discover anything definitive....
     
    Sonic




    Be aware that if you do a test, what you are likely to find is that exporting the exact same mix repeatedly using the same engine will have differences due to the randomness inherent in many synths and plugins. These differences will often be orders of magnitude greater than the difference between the 32 bit and 64 bit engines, making it impossible to know the cause of a difference one is hearing - assuming one actually hears a difference under double blind conditions. 

     In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
    #17
    SonicExplorer
    Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 775
    • Joined: 2004/02/26 16:44:40
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/06 03:57:51 (permalink)
    @drewfx1, wow, thanks. So I will avoid any A/B testing then as I don't need to be chasing my tail with something that won't be a fair/stable test.  
     
    @interpolated, about the W2K/XP thing, this is rather important as I plan to soon build one last backup system and am on the fence about which to choose for OS.   Just because something bypasses the app layer doesn't mean the app layer did something to alter the sound, other than possibly more latency.  I'd need to understand more about WASAPI and any other thing that changed to learn if XP tends to produce superior audio quality over W2K.  I'll try searching around on the forum and see if I can learn anything about it.....
     
    BTW, will Sonar 5 and 6 be able to utilize both CPU cores on XP (Core 2 Duo) ?  
    post edited by SonicExplorer - 2017/07/06 06:24:56
    #18
    mettelus
    Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 5321
    • Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
    • Location: Maryland, USA
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/06 14:08:54 (permalink)
    bitflipper
     
    Mathematically, it's actually quite similar to how your property taxes and bank interests are calculated: when real dollar amounts are multiplied by some rate multiplier, the results are stored in imaginary currency (millicents, or thousandths of a cent). These are intermediate values that will never appear on a tax bill or bank statement. That extra precision reduces the overall rounding error, so that when those numbers are ultimately expressed in real currency the cumulative error will be less than a penny.
     



    Bit's financial analogy is excellent for what is happening inside the box (ITB) and where calculations may (or may not) benefit from 64-bit over 32-bit. Depending on a given VST used, 32-bit is often sufficient for most real-world applications since the excessive detail of 64-bit is not audible (but adds CPU overhead).
     
    Bristol_Jonesey
     
    When playing back what you hear is dictated by your interface, the majority of which operate at 24 bit and in the real world, this can mean the effective bit depth is around 20




    Coupled with that is also Jonesey's post made above. When the ITB calculations exit through your audio interface (AI) so you can hear it, it must be passed the format that the AI can work with (often 24-bit). Basically, you are not "hearing 32 vs 64 at the interface," but the manifestation of the calculation chain, which is always passed to the AI in what it is expecting to see (under the hood SONAR function).
     
    You can get into a lot of discussion on different aspects of the above, but to answer your initial question, it is highly unlikely to hear a difference with the 64-bit double precision engine (DPE) over 32-bit. I have actually had my 64-bit DPE disabled for some time as it has caused issues over time with different builds of SONAR (ones after S5/S6).

    ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
    #19
    SonicExplorer
    Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 775
    • Joined: 2004/02/26 16:44:40
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/07 06:17:51 (permalink)
    Okay, I've spent quite a few hours searching and reading about this W2K/XP/WASAPI/OS sound situation.  Seems to me, when it comes to quality sound cards, their affiliated drivers and reputable DAW software (such as Sonar) there is generally no sound loss in practice due to OS.  Any notion of a kmixer like situation is typically in those cases where the receiving entities accept a common conduit (and therefore potentially combined or altered) signal path.  Otherwise the data mostly passes through (or around if IOCTL or other mechanism if supported) and goes "direct" to sound card.  I say this with understanding there is an I/O OS stack involved.  Slight latency would/should be the only typical impacts.  Yes, in theory there could be buffering etc, but nothing that should alter the actual sound quality per-se.
     
    Anybody disagree with this general conclusion?   And BTW, along these lines I found nothing that provided evidence or explanation of XP being superior in sound over W2K (in context of quality cards/drivers/DAW software such as we are discussing - RME FF, WDM Stream and Sonar more specifically)
     
    Sonic
    post edited by SonicExplorer - 2017/07/07 07:47:23
    #20
    interpolated
    Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 830
    • Joined: 2015/03/26 17:34:58
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/07 06:54:20 (permalink)
    Indeed.

    I have computer stuff.
     
    https://soundcloud.com/sigmadelta
    #21
    brconflict
    Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1891
    • Joined: 2012/10/05 21:28:30
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/17 18:12:24 (permalink)
    SonicExplorer
    Ok, thanks, OS not likely impacting sound quality.
     
    I could swear however I recall hearing a subtle but noticeable and important (to me) difference between 32 and 64 bit mix engine.  I also now vaguely recall making two mixes and comparing them.  Will check around and see if I can find those files....will post back if I discover anything definitive....
     
    Sonic



    Ideally, as anyone would agree, higher resolution is typically better, but other factors may affect this. For example, some A/D converters marketed to convert up to 192Khz may really perform better at 96Khz. So, then, what's the advantage of 192kHz? I would argue, if you can hear a difference, there may be something (plug-in or D/A conversion) that affects the quality of the different bit rates.

    When thinking of 64-bit vs. 32-bit, some amazing sounding mixes were done totally in a 32-bit environment. Some amazing recordings have been made from 16-Bit, 44,100 kHz bit/sampling rates. Partially, the reason is that these factors are far less important than good engineering and tracking skills.

    Whether or not you're a Yes fan, you should go listen to Yes' Talk album sometime. It was recorded using two Macs in tandem (I read) 1993/94, and they had many issues with the technology, per some Chris Squire interviews. But the album (albeit, sterile) is pristine in quality. That was some old technology. It was likely only 16-Bit, 44Khz as tracked. I'd be surprised they even had dithering technology then, because they stayed at the 16-Bit rate.

    When it comes to this subject now with 64-Bit, Sonar includes the 64-Bit Double Precision Engine for projects that contain audio (or all audio) rendered to 64-Bit. As the Sonar documentation alludes, no recording devices really record at anything higher than 24-Bit. Most projects we work on today are 16/24/32-Bit when inside Sonar, but never sampled higher than 24-Bit. So, why do we even need 64-Bit Precision? Only if you're working with a project that was 64-Bit to begin with. This option is disabled by default, because for most purposes, you simply don't need it. 

    Cakewalk could simply be future-proofing their engine as perhaps sampling rates for A/D conversion and VSTi's will become that precise and dynamic.



    Brian
     
    Sonar Platinum, Steinberg Wavelab Pro 9, MOTU 24CoreIO w/ low-slew OP-AMP mods and BLA external clock, True P8, Audient ASP008, API 512c, Chandler Germ500, Summit 2ba-221, GAP Pre-73, Peluso 22251, Peluso 2247LE, Mackie HR824, Polk Audio SRS-SDA 2.3tl w/upgraded Soniccraft crossovers and Goertz cables, powered by Pass-X350. All wiring Star-Quad XLR or Monster Cable. Power by Monster Power Signature AVS2000 voltage stabilizer and Signature Pro Power 5100 PowerCenter on a 20A isolation shielded circuit.
    #22
    soens
    Max Output Level: -23.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 5154
    • Joined: 2005/09/16 03:19:55
    • Location: Location: Location
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/18 05:42:59 (permalink)
    The short answer () would be: Try it both ways and see if you hear a difference. If not, why bother?! I normally don't use it when mixing to 44/16 for everyday listening. But there may be other reasons to use it.
     
    The even shorter answer is: It's there if and when you need it. If you don't know you need it, you probably don't.
    #23
    pwalpwal
    Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3249
    • Joined: 2015/01/17 03:52:50
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/18 12:23:32 (permalink)
    the more itb processing you do the more worthwhile it becomes

    just a sec

    #24
    drewfx1
    Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 6585
    • Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/18 17:03:36 (permalink)
    pwalpwal
    the more itb processing you do the more worthwhile it becomes




    So please tell us how much is too much and how you arrived at that particular amount.

     In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
    #25
    pwalpwal
    Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3249
    • Joined: 2015/01/17 03:52:50
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/19 10:33:51 (permalink)
    drewfx1
    pwalpwal
    the more itb processing you do the more worthwhile it becomes




    So please tell us how much is too much and how you arrived at that particular amount.


    it's purely maths - 64 is more accurate (the decimal places go further) - same reason to do itb processing at > 48k SR even if you can't hear it ;-)

    just a sec

    #26
    brconflict
    Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1891
    • Joined: 2012/10/05 21:28:30
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/19 15:13:29 (permalink)
    Found this old Cakewalk video regarding this very question.

    Brian
     
    Sonar Platinum, Steinberg Wavelab Pro 9, MOTU 24CoreIO w/ low-slew OP-AMP mods and BLA external clock, True P8, Audient ASP008, API 512c, Chandler Germ500, Summit 2ba-221, GAP Pre-73, Peluso 22251, Peluso 2247LE, Mackie HR824, Polk Audio SRS-SDA 2.3tl w/upgraded Soniccraft crossovers and Goertz cables, powered by Pass-X350. All wiring Star-Quad XLR or Monster Cable. Power by Monster Power Signature AVS2000 voltage stabilizer and Signature Pro Power 5100 PowerCenter on a 20A isolation shielded circuit.
    #27
    eikelbijter
    Max Output Level: -70 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1002
    • Joined: 2003/11/13 22:23:52
    • Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/19 15:37:38 (permalink)
    The short and the long answer are both no.
     
    R

    Xeon E3-1231V3, 16GB RAM, 480GB 840EVO SSD, MOTU 2480MK3, 424PCI w/ Sonar Platinum
    Dell XPS 18, i5, 12GB RAM, 500GB SSD+128GB SSD, Roland VS-100 w/ Sonar Platinum

    Dell XPS 13, i5, 8GB RAM, 256GB 840EVO SSD, Zoom UAC-2, Sonar Platinum

    http://www.RicoBelled.com/

    #28
    drewfx1
    Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 6585
    • Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/19 16:44:28 (permalink)
    pwalpwal
    drewfx1
    pwalpwal
    the more itb processing you do the more worthwhile it becomes




    So please tell us how much is too much and how you arrived at that particular amount.


    it's purely maths - 64 is more accurate (the decimal places go further) - same reason to do itb processing at > 48k SR even if you can't hear it ;-)




    But the point is that it doesn't matter if it's "more accurate" if it's already at a ridiculously low level and buried under noise from other sources and most of the errors won't even make it into a 24 bit output. 
     
    IMO, it is not helpful to just claim something is "more accurate" because unfortunately when it comes to audio for some reason people will just assume that it must be audible under circumstances they might encounter.
     
    And upsampling to do processing at > 48 kHz in cases where there is no benefit only adds latency, wastes CPU and adds filter artifacts to your audio (even if you can't hear them).

     In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
    #29
    brconflict
    Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1891
    • Joined: 2012/10/05 21:28:30
    • Status: offline
    Re: 64-bit Mix Engine Question 2017/07/19 20:57:57 (permalink)
    Technical vs. practical is a condition not met in many people's minds--not calling anyone out, just in general populations. If you think of Limits in Calculus I, there are many things we can sample nearly perfectly but never ever reach absolute perfection. When it comes to sampling audio, for example, you can never sample fast enough to make the sampled audio absolutely a perfect match to the source.
     
    In the case of 32 vs. 64 bit, sure, a calculation can be infinitely more accurate, but when do you stop hearing the difference? At what point does Pi become easier to round off to be effective? When it comes to tape, as in full analog, if 32-bit audio is audibly better, what's the true benefit of going to 64-bit for most people?

    I won't downplay the benefit of 64-Bit (I export at 64-Bit precision), but I don't see the benefit of mixing with the 64-Bit double-precision engine.
    post edited by brconflict - 2017/07/19 21:34:59

    Brian
     
    Sonar Platinum, Steinberg Wavelab Pro 9, MOTU 24CoreIO w/ low-slew OP-AMP mods and BLA external clock, True P8, Audient ASP008, API 512c, Chandler Germ500, Summit 2ba-221, GAP Pre-73, Peluso 22251, Peluso 2247LE, Mackie HR824, Polk Audio SRS-SDA 2.3tl w/upgraded Soniccraft crossovers and Goertz cables, powered by Pass-X350. All wiring Star-Quad XLR or Monster Cable. Power by Monster Power Signature AVS2000 voltage stabilizer and Signature Pro Power 5100 PowerCenter on a 20A isolation shielded circuit.
    #30
    Page: 12 > Showing page 1 of 2
    Jump to:
    © 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1