Gaffpro


There's a very close friend of mine who records in 16 bit in Logic & Pro Tools and states to me that he really can't hear a difference at the end of the day. I record in Sonar 24 bit because of the added headroom.....his track record includes being one of the engineers on Eric Clapton's Layla album

Was  that particular record of Eric's recorded in 16 or 24 bit ?

  I disagree about recording in 16 bit vs. 24 bit. The noise floor in 24 bit is noticeably lower. 16 bit sample libraries sound fine, but fo my own recordings, it's 24 bit all the way. lightninrick

Hey there Craig. I just bought BFD ECO for 14.00 (29-15.00 coupon) from Audiomidi. That's a Steal. Thanks to all! Oh yeah..the $15.00 coupon is what you get for registering at there (apparently) new website. The coupon code is "am 15".

digitalboy

Gaffpro


There's a very close friend of mine who records in 16 bit in Logic & Pro Tools and states to me that he really can't hear a difference at the end of the day. I record in Sonar 24 bit because of the added headroom.....his track record includes being one of the engineers on Eric Clapton's Layla album

Was  that particular record of Eric's recorded in 16 or 24 bit ?

Good one! lol
 

lightninrick


  I disagree about recording in 16 bit vs. 24 bit. The noise floor in 24 bit is noticeably lower. 16 bit sample libraries sound fine, but fo my own recordings, it's 24 bit all the way. lightninrick

I'm just stating what he told me.....

I do like BFD Eco. I got it for $49 at Sweetwater on sale (along with a "BFD greatest hits vol1" disc) and it's definitely worth it, so for $29 (or $14) I say jump in with both feet. 

No problems in x64 even though it's 32-bit. Bitbridge does the job. What annoys me is that the presets for the expansion disc aren't compatible with BFD Eco - the samples are, and the individual instruments can be selected, but there's no way to just load up a kit from the "greatest hits" disc without creating your own presets.  You can see complaints about this in the FXPansion forums, and they recognize the complaint but haven't done anything about it.  Life goes on; I can map my own, it's just kinda dopey.  And it doesn't apply if you don't have any BFD expansions to use with BFD Eco.

twaddle
Well like I said "almost no one" and as the old saying goes,
"there's always one"

Have you taken the blind fold test to see whether or not you can give credence to such wild claims?

Steve

In general, the difference between 24 bit and 16 bit is that at 16 bit resolution, lower-level recordings are noticeably noisier and less distinct.  24 bit gives you lots more headroom to work with--recordings made at a low level sound fine when more gain is applied.  With drum sounds, you'd probably notice the difference first in lower-velocity cymbal hits, which have lots of frequencies and ring for a while, so there's something to hear.  With loud kicks, snares, etc. you might indeed not notice the difference much or at all. 
 
In an interview in Sound on Sound, Demo Castillo, who mixes Madonna, Timbaland, Justin Timberlake, etc. said that he can hear the difference between 24 bit and 16 bit, but he can't hear the difference between 44.1 kHz and 96 kHz.   I typically record at 24 bit 44.1 kHZ, because I feel the same way.
 
However, if your music ever gets quiet, you will probably find that it sounds better recorded at 24 bits than at 16 bits.
 
Thanks, ightninrick

lightninrick
I typically record at 24 bit 44.1 kHZ, because I feel the same way.

+1. Seems about the sweet spot, no?