Pastacrow
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 105
- Joined: 2010/12/10 17:34:29
- Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Status: offline
What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
I am a very long time Cakewalk user but have never had to consider some of the new question raised by moving to a new audio interface (Roland Octacapture) on a new computer (Win 7x64 bit computer with Sonar X1 64 bit). My audio driver is set to 24 bit / 96000 Hz sample rate with the 64 bit double precision Engine ticked 'yes'.
However, in the Preferences/Audio Data tab I have options for 'recording' and 'rendering' bit depths of either 16/24/32 or 64. Which bit depth should I be using to maintain the best signal quality until my final mixdown and dithering (disk space is not an issue)? Is it a case of biggest is simply best, or should one even consider a chain of 24 bit the whole way through - from audio driver to record and render. Also, should ‘record bit depth’ and ‘render bit depth’ always be identical values (ie 32 and 32, or 64 and 64)?
Lastly, when I go to export my files - what is the purpose of the '64 bit Engine' check box? Does it have any bearing on dithering or file size, or is it just related to processor speed and efficiency?
Thanks in advance for any responses!
Sonar Platinum (Lifetime!) + Samplitude Pro X3 Suite + Presonus Studio One 3(previously Cakewalk & Pro Audio 3,5,6,8,9 | Sonar 2,3,5,6,8,8.5 | Sonar Producer X1,X2,X3E )Intel Core i7-4790 / 3.6 / 16 GB RAM240 GB SSD / 2.0 TB HD / 2GB Nvidia GTX750ti / Windows 8.1 x 64bit UAD Apollo Twin USB / Roland Octacapture
|
Abbie
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 98
- Joined: 2007/02/11 22:57:40
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/01 10:54:07
(permalink)
Although most everyone mixes down to 44.1/16bit, I use 96K/24bit. It uses more hard-drive space. However, it utilizes the most out of your plugin effects. I don't notice a difference going higher than 96K/24bit, and can't justify the extremely large file sizes. However, consider your dithering (adding noise) when converting down to 44.1/16bit. Dithering is a deep subject on its own, but choosing the right one makes a noticeable difference.
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/01 12:57:19
(permalink)
The term "rendering" refers to the format used internally when bouncing/freezing tracks. Set it to 32 bits and forget about it. Don't bother with 64-bit rendering, it just eats disk space with no appreciable benefit. It is not necessary to render at 64 bits in order to use 64-bit precision in calculations.
The render-at option is separate from whatever bit depth you record at or export to. If your interface records 24-bit data, it will be automatically converted to your render bit depth when it's brought into SONAR, e.g. 32 bits. Even though the ultimate product may be 16 bits for CD, it's still best to work with 32-bit float data in all the intermediate stages between recording and export.
Render bit depth is also separate from the 64-bit option when exporting. All that does is tell SONAR to use 64-bit math when making its calculations. It does not result in bigger files, but it does use more memory during the export process. Whether it has an perceptible effect on the ultimate product is debatable, but unless you're short on RAM you may as well turn it on.
 All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
Bristol_Jonesey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 16775
- Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
- Location: Bristol, UK
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/01 15:12:35
(permalink)
^^^ Sticky candidate. Well, not you personally Bit 
CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughoutCustom 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,
|
Pastacrow
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 105
- Joined: 2010/12/10 17:34:29
- Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/02 09:21:45
(permalink)
Thanks folks for your replies! I appreciate your responses.
Bitflipper, I think I now better understand the 'rendering' side of it, but I'm still not as confident understanding the relationship between the audio driver 'bit depth' (24 in my case) and the 'record' file bit depth option - if there is any. From what you say - I take it to mean that they do not need to be identical and so a value of 32 for recording is a sensible choice.
Sonar Platinum (Lifetime!) + Samplitude Pro X3 Suite + Presonus Studio One 3(previously Cakewalk & Pro Audio 3,5,6,8,9 | Sonar 2,3,5,6,8,8.5 | Sonar Producer X1,X2,X3E )Intel Core i7-4790 / 3.6 / 16 GB RAM240 GB SSD / 2.0 TB HD / 2GB Nvidia GTX750ti / Windows 8.1 x 64bit UAD Apollo Twin USB / Roland Octacapture
|
MarkSwanson
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 23
- Joined: 2007/02/04 10:32:09
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/02 12:13:15
(permalink)
I just discovered a weirdness with the 64 bit engine. When I attempt to use the faders (see the thread I posted on it) they go mute, rather than fading. Unchecking the 64 bit option causes the faders to work correctly again. Anybody have any ideas about why?
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/02 19:31:54
(permalink)
From what you say - I take it to mean that they do not need to be identical and so a value of 32 for recording is a sensible choice. Yup.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
BenMMusTech
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2606
- Joined: 2011/05/23 16:59:57
- Location: Warragul, Victoria-Australia
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/02 21:03:53
(permalink)
Bitflipper is correct, 32 bit all the way. Read this blog http://www.futureproducers.com/forums/production-techniques/recording-mixing-mastering/16-24-32-bit-recording-does-help-my-mix-269302/ it will explain the process better than I can. A couple of things though, the real benefit of 32 bit is mixing in the box, what 32 bit does is give us back our headroom, just like an anolouge mixing desk. What this means is as long as the signal or the program audio does not touch the converters some digital overs, not always in the red is now acceptable. Ok why is this good? as we know driving an anolouge mixing desk produces at times pleasing results, why this may not be the case with our DAW's the best part of a digital waveform is the actual very tip, so if we want to get the warmth of a recording we have to have a fairly hot signal (just have a listen to a bass or a drum kit with an 1176 plug and push that baby into the red, just and you will hear what I mean), we then use the trim tool to adjust the iput of each channel, this is the biggest fundemental thing that a lot of people don't understand you want the average level of each track to be relative and this means somtimes you will push the program audio into the red but as I say this is not a bad thing anymore, no matter what anybody else is saying. The other thing you have to remember about 32 bit is dithering, say if for some reason you had to bounce down to 24 bit for mastering, dither from 32 bit to 24 bit, this is because quantization errors really only affect time based plugs things such as: chorus, delays, flangers and phasers. This is also the case with 24 bit, once again if you had to bounce the track down to a stereo file for mastering make sure you dither at this stage and not in the mastering stage. This will make sure you don't loose any of the nice tails in your time based effects. Why you may ask do we dither at 24 bit, this is because all internal processing is done at 32 bit even if you have the render 24 bit selected. The best way to master these days in my opinion is to run the mix and master to to together and master off the main mix buss but this is not always possible. This is why you have to be aware of all the options in regards to dithering and 32 bit.
|
A1MixMan
Max Output Level: -58 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1706
- Joined: 2003/11/19 16:15:11
- Location: SunriseStudios
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/02 21:20:16
(permalink)
Great question. I've always wondered this myself... 
|
Pastacrow
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 105
- Joined: 2010/12/10 17:34:29
- Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/03 01:35:36
(permalink)
Thanks again Bitflipper and thanks Ben (interesting article too)
Sonar Platinum (Lifetime!) + Samplitude Pro X3 Suite + Presonus Studio One 3(previously Cakewalk & Pro Audio 3,5,6,8,9 | Sonar 2,3,5,6,8,8.5 | Sonar Producer X1,X2,X3E )Intel Core i7-4790 / 3.6 / 16 GB RAM240 GB SSD / 2.0 TB HD / 2GB Nvidia GTX750ti / Windows 8.1 x 64bit UAD Apollo Twin USB / Roland Octacapture
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/03 02:13:13
(permalink)
 LOL Today, Who cares about any disk space? 32bit are just fine... but I use 64bit file size and you should do the same if you use a 64bit system. ( as 90% already do here) It's larger file size, but technical it's faster for the computer and SONAR X1 to read the DATA file in 64bit DATA size. That means increase of performance reading the DATA into memory. 32bit string are always slower...24bit 16bit even slower... In the end nothing of this means much. Today the computers are so fast anyway. 32bit or 64bit... the choice is yours...anything will do as long you don't use lower then 32bit floating (or 24bit for those DAWs that are limit to only use max= 24bit file size example LOGIC). Best Regards Freddie
post edited by Freddie H - 2011/07/03 02:24:14
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/03 11:41:47
(permalink)
technical it's faster for the computer and SONAR X1 to read the DATA file in 64bit DATA size. Where on earth did you get that notion, Freddie?
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
Bub 
Max Output Level: -3.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7196
- Joined: 2010/10/25 10:22:13
- Location: Sneaking up behind you!
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/03 12:38:35
(permalink)
Are we talking about 'Render' bit depth or 'Record' bit depth or both?
What I'm gathering is, render and record bit depth both should be set to 32 bit? I always thought the record bit depth should match your audio card drivers native bit depth?
"I pulled the head off Elvis, filled Fred up to his pelvis, yaba daba do, the King is gone, and so are you."
|
sharpdion23
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 784
- Joined: 2009/04/26 18:07:59
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/03 14:58:11
(permalink)
I have my rec at 24 and ren at 32
Win7 pro 64bit*SonarX1 PE 64 bit* AMD Athlon(tm)64 X2 Dual Processor 6000+ 3.00 Ghz* 4GB Ram* 232GB HD* Cakewalk MA-15D* SPS-66 FireWire
Owner of Sonar 6 Studio* Sonar 7 PE * Sonar 8.0 PE * Sonar 8.5.3 PE * Sonar X1 PE *
Link to upload Screens: http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=1592276 A lot of people are afraid of heights. Not me, I'm afraid of widths.
|
BenMMusTech
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2606
- Joined: 2011/05/23 16:59:57
- Location: Warragul, Victoria-Australia
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/03 19:07:12
(permalink)
bitflipper
technical it's faster for the computer and SONAR X1 to read the DATA file in 64bit DATA size.
Where on earth did you get that notion, Freddie?
Read the blog link I posted, it explains it all and why Freddie is right, kind of!!!! but it all depends on having a 64 bit system all the way, this is where it gets tricky and I will say and I will have my head chopped off stick with 32 bit all the way until we are forced into 64 bit. I say this because who want's the headache that is 64 bit at the moment. Yes I know most of you are running 64 bit systems with a lot of succsess but I am also running a very stable system with heeps of grunt and I still haven't made the upgrade to 64 bit. To the OP ignore this conversation, it has little to do with your original question.
|
sykodelic
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 612
- Joined: 2011/05/17 15:44:28
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/03 21:20:24
(permalink)
I will have my head chopped off stick with 32 bit all the way until we are forced into 64 bit.
64 bit is here might as well go 64bit. Running synths like omnisphere and Kontakt without having access to the extra ram allowed by 64 bit would not work well for me.
Asus P8P67 pro, I7 2600K, 8G Kingston Hyperflex, 2 1T WD Caviar Black(sytem,audio), 2T WD Caviar Black(samples), RME Multiface, Roland A500 Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate 64, Sonar X1C, Ableton Live 8, Reason 6, Komplete 7, DCAM Synth Squad, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian
|
BenMMusTech
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2606
- Joined: 2011/05/23 16:59:57
- Location: Warragul, Victoria-Australia
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/03 23:34:22
(permalink)
sykodelic
I will have my head chopped off stick with 32 bit all the way until we are forced into 64 bit.
64 bit is here might as well go 64bit. Running synths like omnisphere and Kontakt without having access to the extra ram allowed by 64 bit would not work well for me.
But it is not!!! We have a mixture of 32 bit applications and 64 bit applications and from what I am reading bitbridge and jbridge still are a little buggy, why? I ask do we need to **** around with a two boot system or the buggy bridges when I know that we don't need the extra power 64 bit affords us. Yes if I was going to run a whole symphony off my laptop virtual or real, then I can see the benifits of 64 bit over 32 bit but for the beginers and the hobbyist it is not nesacery and all this debate does is confuse the issue which the OP has brought up.
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 00:36:22
(permalink)
Read the blog link I posted, it explains it all and why Freddie is right, kind of!!!! Sorry, Ben but I couldn't find any mention at the link regarding 64-bit disk transfers.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
sykodelic
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 612
- Joined: 2011/05/17 15:44:28
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 01:18:44
(permalink)
I cleaned house when I went 64 bit. I don't use any 32 bit vsti's anymore and could not be happier. Most of the plugs I had already released 64 bit anyway. The only exception I run DCAM synth squad and occasionally Kore player in bridge mode sometimes and it works fine. Why would I want a 32 bit system when all the plugs I care about are in 64bit and I can access more RAM which I use.
post edited by sykodelic - 2011/07/04 01:21:16
Asus P8P67 pro, I7 2600K, 8G Kingston Hyperflex, 2 1T WD Caviar Black(sytem,audio), 2T WD Caviar Black(samples), RME Multiface, Roland A500 Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate 64, Sonar X1C, Ableton Live 8, Reason 6, Komplete 7, DCAM Synth Squad, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 01:24:04
(permalink)
sykodelic
I cleaned house when I went 64 bit. I don't use any 32 bit vsti's anymore and could not be happier. Most of the plugs I had already released 64 bit anyway.
The only exception I run DCAM synth squad and occasionally Kore player in bridge mode sometimes and it works fine.
Why would I want a 32 bit system when all the plugs I care about are in 64bit and I can access more RAM which I use.
+1 I couldn't agree more! 
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 01:25:15
(permalink)
BenMMusTech
bitflipper
technical it's faster for the computer and SONAR X1 to read the DATA file in 64bit DATA size.
Where on earth did you get that notion, Freddie?
Read the blog link I posted, it explains it all and why Freddie is right, kind of!!!! but it all depends on having a 64 bit system all the way, this is where it gets tricky and I will say and I will have my head chopped off stick with 32 bit all the way until we are forced into 64 bit. I say this because who want's the headache that is 64 bit at the moment. Yes I know most of you are running 64 bit systems with a lot of succsess but I am also running a very stable system with heeps of grunt and I still haven't made the upgrade to 64 bit.
To the OP ignore this conversation, it has little to do with your original question.
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
BenMMusTech
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2606
- Joined: 2011/05/23 16:59:57
- Location: Warragul, Victoria-Australia
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 03:41:24
(permalink)
bitflipper
Read the blog link I posted, it explains it all and why Freddie is right, kind of!!!!
Sorry, Ben but I couldn't find any mention at the link regarding 64-bit disk transfers.
Some people record at 32 bit anyway, even though the result is a 24 bit signal in a 32 bit packet, with the extra 8 bits padded out with zeros. The reason for this is that most DAW apps nowadays carry out all internal processing, including gain changes, at 32 bit floating point. What this means is that there is not bit depth conversion during processing, which means that processing is marginally quicker. the gains in this are unclear at the moment, and proabbly vary from system to system. There is certainly a big impact on your storage capacity, as all your files will be considerably larger. Now for sample rate: Here is the passage and I took the line "which means that processing is marginally quicker" as to be what we are talking about and this would apply to 32 bit and 64 bit but I have more information and I will read through it tommrow and post once I understand what freddie is talking about, I too have read what freddie is saying but as I say I will have a look through my research and get back to you all. As for freddie, I was not attacking 64 bit or saying it was bad or good, I was just saying it was confusing the issue and there was little point to it apart from those running extream mixes.
|
DeeringAmps
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2614
- Joined: 2005/10/03 10:29:25
- Location: Seattle area
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 09:41:51
(permalink)
BenMMusTech
A couple of things though, the real benefit of 32 bit is mixing in the box, what 32 bit does is give us back our headroom, just like an anolouge mixing desk. What this means is as long as the signal or the program audio does not touch the converters some digital overs, not always in the red is now acceptable. Ok why is this good? as we know driving an anolouge mixing desk produces at times pleasing results, why this may not be the case with our DAW's the best part of a digital waveform is the actual very tip, so if we want to get the warmth of a recording we have to have a fairly hot signal (just have a listen to a bass or a drum kit with an 1176 plug and push that baby into the red, just and you will hear what I mean), we then use the trim tool to adjust the iput of each channel, this is the biggest fundemental thing that a lot of people don't understand you want the average level of each track to be relative and this means somtimes you will push the program audio into the red but as I say this is not a bad thing anymore, no matter what anybody else is saying.
Not trying to be contentious here, but this goes against everything I think I know about digital. What I think I'm taking away from this is that as long as the "overs" do not hit the DA converter I'm good? Ben are you sure the "warmth" you hear isn't just due to the signal getting louder? Make it louder or brighter; right? I know this is apples to oranges here but I'm sure the "warmth" that we think we hear in valve amps is caused when the circuit is pushed past the point of linear response (in general BEFORE clipping, its guitarists generally, not audiophiles, that enjoy the clipped signal). I think (and I could be wrong) that the "sound" of some "classic" analogue (assuming here that Ben is from Brittan and enjoys the "colour" added by classic analogue gear) desks is actually their non-linear defects. I've seen a video interview somewhere with one of the designers at SSL (I think I'm right) that the desk was terribly "flawed", phase issues, etc., but sounded "great". Again, I'm not trying to be contentious, but I just don't accept that digital overs are going to respond like saturated tape, or discrete analog components. That just flies in the face of what I "think" I know about digital. Fellas?
Tom Deering Tascam FW-1884 User Resources Page Firewire "Legacy" Tutorial, Service Manual, Schematic, and Service Bulletins Win10x64 StudioCat Pro Studio Coffee Lake 8086k 32gb RAM  RME UFX (Audio) Tascam FW-1884 (Control) in Win 10x64 Pro
|
Bristol_Jonesey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 16775
- Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
- Location: Bristol, UK
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 10:49:11
(permalink)
As has been demonstrated many times on this forum, you can't "clip" a track You can clip your DA (bad news) You can clip a plug (possibly bad news) But provided you lower your Master Bus fader to a point where it's not in the red, your tracks can APPEAR to be clipping wildly, yet your interface will remain in it's happy place 
CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughoutCustom 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,
|
DeeringAmps
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2614
- Joined: 2005/10/03 10:29:25
- Location: Seattle area
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 10:56:44
(permalink)
And doing so, "pushing" if you like, the track, I will get analog (I'm in the States) type response?
Tom Deering Tascam FW-1884 User Resources Page Firewire "Legacy" Tutorial, Service Manual, Schematic, and Service Bulletins Win10x64 StudioCat Pro Studio Coffee Lake 8086k 32gb RAM RME UFX (Audio) Tascam FW-1884 (Control) in Win 10x64 Pro
|
Bristol_Jonesey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 16775
- Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
- Location: Bristol, UK
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 11:01:48
(permalink)
I'd say definitely not.
I guess it all depends on whatever plugins are present in the signal path and how well they react to being pushed harder.
If there are no plugs, all you'll get is increased loudness (at track level)
CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughoutCustom 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,
|
DeeringAmps
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2614
- Joined: 2005/10/03 10:29:25
- Location: Seattle area
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 11:08:00
(permalink)
Bristol,
You and I are on the same page then "Louder = Better" or explains why we "think" it sounds better.
We still have to use our "ears" on what effect the "clipping", really the "overs" are doing in the signal chain.
I might be a bit less "obsessed" with the reds "internally" from now on, but I'm sure I'm not adding "analogue" warmth in doing so.
Thanks for that.
Tom Deering Tascam FW-1884 User Resources Page Firewire "Legacy" Tutorial, Service Manual, Schematic, and Service Bulletins Win10x64 StudioCat Pro Studio Coffee Lake 8086k 32gb RAM RME UFX (Audio) Tascam FW-1884 (Control) in Win 10x64 Pro
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 12:36:33
(permalink)
If the master bus is going into the red, use the master bus trim control to bring it down to where it's peaking between -6 to -12db. This applies whether or not you're doing your own mastering in place, deferring volume maximizing to a later step or sending it out for mastering.
What you don't want to do is simply stick a limiter on the bus and let it deal with the problem. That's a recipe for disaster, but I've seen numerous how-to videos on youtube that recommend exactly that!
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
DeeringAmps
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2614
- Joined: 2005/10/03 10:29:25
- Location: Seattle area
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 13:04:59
(permalink)
Dave,
"Trim" (I think its "Gain" now in X1, 8.5.3 is calling it "Input Gain") verses just pulling down the Fader?
You're OK with "reds" on the Tracks as long as I don't "hear" any discernible distortion?
Tom Deering Tascam FW-1884 User Resources Page Firewire "Legacy" Tutorial, Service Manual, Schematic, and Service Bulletins Win10x64 StudioCat Pro Studio Coffee Lake 8086k 32gb RAM RME UFX (Audio) Tascam FW-1884 (Control) in Win 10x64 Pro
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re:What 'Rendering' bit depth should I be using?
2011/07/04 13:51:14
(permalink)
The fader is after the FX bin; the Trim/Input is before it. So lowering the Input controls the level sent to FX plugins.
If all the plugins are linear (meaning they don't change anything based on signal level), then it doesn't much matter which one you use.
But general rule could be stated as:
"Faders are for mixing and trims are for gain staging."
 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.
|