Hello everyone.
 
As noted by yours truly in a prior post, I am coming from the old-school of recording--32 channel mixing board, 32 tracks digital audio tape, racks of effects, broker than dirt from buying all that stuff; you know, that guy.
 
Things have certainly changed since those days!
 
I guess I'd better swallow my pride and just ask a few questions rather than continuing to act like I know what I'm talking about. This is all regarding the Preferences setting for audio drivers, playback and recording in Preferences for SONAR X3 Studio:
 
1. Under "Audio/Driver Settings" there is the Audio Driver Bit Depth drop down. Mine is grayed out at 24, and I can either select or deselect the 64-bit Double Precision Engine. I assume the former is grayed out due to my interface or system limits? What's the "double precision engine all about." To use, or not to use; that is the question.
 
2. Sampling Rate: I understand this part just fine, but if the highest possible level for a finished CD is 41k, and 48k is considered pro-level audio recording, why go to some higher/outlandish number? I've been working at 96K, and to my ears there is a distinct difference from 41K or 48K, but maybe that's just wishful thinking or it doesn't matter in the end. Then again, I suppose starting with a better product means that product will be produced overall with a better sound. Still, any words of wisdom here are welcomed. If I could choose any rate I wanted, would the highest be the way to go? Is there a generally accepted best practice with this (and if so, does it vary from phase to phase of the production process)?
 
3. Under "File/Audio Data," I again have choices to make under the File bit-depths section: Record bit depth, Render Bit Depth and Import Bit Depth are requesting my instructions! First off, I'm a bit confused; if I'm recording at 24-bits, why save to 32, or 64. To play it safe, I'm working with 24 bit for Record and Render currently, but am leaving Import Depth at "Original." Should changes be made in my selections?
 
Thanks much for any help!
 
 

I'll try to answer in my non technical terms.  Using the higher rates allows you to mess with the files more and each time you do so, they will be rounded off to the nearest common denominator on your results.(remember digital is just "0" and "1")  Therefore, if you do A LOT of messing around, they will be rounded off several times...either to the "nearest 0 or 1...if that makes sense. After awhile, your file may "stray" from what it was originally, if it has been averaged or rounded off a couple times....i.e...by processing your audio.  The more presice the recording method, the smaller degrees of what thing get "changed" when "rounding off".   Think of a square wave or stair steps...the smaller the "steps" , the lesser amount of change will take place of the overall picture, if a step was slightly alter, omitted or rounded off.
Most likely you will not hear the differences on immediate playback of something freshly recorded, but the idea of a cumulative effect can happen.  People with 'ears' claim in critical areas like reverb and cymbal tails, the idea of what I'm talking about becomes more audible.
 
Therefore, generally speaking as I understand, if you've got the computer horsepower, go for the highest it can comfortably handle.  Otherwise back it down (leave the 64bit engine off, etc), but I'd stay at least 24 bit as a min.
 
There...I "hacked" thru that explanation...   not necessarily technically accurate, but trying to give a picture.
 
btw...it's 44.1...not 41

1. Under 64 bit double precision engine. Leave this unchecked as currently there are some issues which will be fixed in an upcoming update.

2. At the moment many record acoustic material at 96khz but the choice is really yours. It uses far more disc space but if you have it to spare why not. As you say you can hear a difference so go for it. I use it for detailed acoustic guitar or a violin maybe even a delicate vocal but if it was going into a heavy rock number I d stay with 48khz as that is the DVD or High Definition Audio sampling rate.

3. Current best practice is Import bit depth at original, record at 24 bit and render at 32 bit. The 32 bit render is only for internal processing and provides for greater resolution it's called 32 bit floating point.


There'll be others come along and go into a great deal of detail for you but what I've given you is the result without much explanation. All the best.

Griz,
a lot of these topics have been covered in other posts, but here we go.
 
1.  24 bits is what your ADDA interface is set to, so SONAR takes its que from that.  You can change it w/ your interface software.  64 bit double precision engine is what SONAR processes the sound with - hence the "double" the usual 32 bits.  Basically it means less rounding errors when the math doesn't divide in wholes.  If you are looking for Pi, you can go much farther down into the numbers.  Theoretically, it should deliver a more faithful sound when you mix or apply effects.  My suggestion is to try it and if you hear a difference for the better, use it.  Note that there were some problems w/ it in X3, causing some people problems.  I don't know whether X3D (coming soon!) fixes that.  Again, try it.  Me, I use it.  It puts no real strain on my computer, so, why not?
 
2.  Sample rate.  Lots of opinions on this.  Again, if you hear a difference, use what sounds better.  Lavry, maker of boutique ADDAs, has an old white paper saying the best sampling rate is in the 60s.  Higher and there are problems, and lower rates cause problems w/ the filters.  However, today, most of the early filter problems are solved, even for low budget stuff.  People used to claim they could hear a difference in some makes between 40s and higher rates, esp. lower budget gear.  On the other side I interviewed Rupert Neve and he declared low sampling rates were the problem.  Of course, he also said the only digital, on/off application he was familiar w/ was morse code he learned in WWII (royal signal corp).  I do trust his ears, tho, even tho he is in his 80s.  At first glance, using higher rates seems obvious, but I'm not sold.  I record at 44.1.
 
3. Render.  Again, this has to do w/ upsampling for anything other than mere playback - how much math is used to combine all the various things during mixing.  32 bit is pretty standard these days, which is what I use.  I suppose I should use 64 bit, but I edit in an old Sound Forge which defaults to 32 bit.  Never had a problem and I can pull in files from SONAR directly.  It just makes my life easier.  As far as importing - I use original file depth.  Makes no sense to re-render the file since you are just using it to playback.  It will get rendered at high rate/depth like all your 32 bit files.  Makes no nevermind as it sits on the timeline.
 
Lots of fun stuff here and opinions and even some facts (I may have gotten some wrong in the above and I'm sure I'll be told about it).  Read, ingest and then figure out what system is most comfortable to you.  Higher file quality is good in theory, but sometimes it is easier to use lower settings.  For the most part, if you did blind tests, most people couldn't tell the difference, I would bet.
 
have fun
 
@

Thanks for the very clear answers folks! Greatly appreciated. I feel much more comfortable now. Probably the best news I got from all of it is that there are no "wrong" answers really, so tinkering does no harm.
 
So I'll stay with 24 bit depth, use 24 bit file size, 32 - 64 bit render, and "original" for the import depth. I'll have to tinker with sampling rates--I see a lot of the bigger boys use the 96K, and some it seems go even higher into the 130s range. That's probably overkill and I don't feel like waiting four days for file conversions to occur.
 
I suppose my last question is this then:
If I am using a recording bit-depth of 24, does it make any sense to save files to a higher bit rez? I mean, the system is going to convert them back, or will that go under the "import" category even for my own projects? In other words, does the recorded bit-depth or the saved bit-depth come back into the system and get used? Historically, the idea of repeatedly upsampling hasn't been considered the best of ideas, but again, things have changed a lot. I could go as high as 64 for render and file size, so if disk space is the only issue, is there any reason to or not to go for the gusto?