AudioMasters
User Info & Key Stats
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
November 12, 2007, 09:24:43 PM
62111
Posts in
6146
Topics by
2111
Members
Latest Member:
cereboso
News:
|
Forum Rules
AudioMasters
Audio Software
Previous Versions
Cool Edit 96, 2000, 1.2a
Which 32-bit format is better?
« previous
next »
Pages:
[
1
]
Author
Topic: Which 32-bit format is better? (Read 2102 times)
«
on:
October 30, 2006, 12:01:51 AM »
MrHope
Member
Posts: 53
Which 32-bit format is better?
In the Save As... options menu there is a list of 32-bit file formats.
I'm wondering which format is best to use?
Are floats better than ints? Are packed ints worse than unpacked ints?
Which format is better?
Logged
Reply #1
«
on:
October 30, 2006, 02:56:03 AM »
SteveG
Administrator
Member
Posts: 8250
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
Quote from: MrHope
In the Save As... options menu there is a list of 32-bit file formats.
I'm wondering which format is best to use?
By and large there's no difference in the 32-bit formats from a 'best' point of view, except that Audition has least to do when it opens its default one.
Quote
Are floats better than ints? Are packed ints worse than unpacked ints?
Floating point formats are going to be better than any int format below some
ridiculous
figure for the number of bits - around 256 bits of int roughly equals 32-bit FP. Packed or unpacked makes no difference - all this represents is a way of not wasting so much space by needlessly filling it with zeros, and using it for a byte of the following 24-bit word instead. But there is no
inherent
quality difference between the formats - except in their ability to store more detailed audio information.
Just stick with Audition's 32-bit FP format - you won't go wrong.
But you should note that the foregoing only applies to storage - for manipulation, a different set of rules applies.
Logged
Reply #2
«
on:
November 13, 2006, 01:19:56 AM »
FunDog
Member
Posts: 48
Which 32-bit format is better?
Which format
is
better for manipulating, processing the audio?
Logged
Reply #3
«
on:
November 13, 2006, 02:13:15 AM »
SteveG
Administrator
Member
Posts: 8250
Which 32-bit format is better?
Already told you...
Logged
Reply #4
«
on:
November 25, 2006, 08:30:59 PM »
MrHope
Member
Posts: 53
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
I did some research and experimentation and it seems like 24 bit int is the most compatible for the programs that I use and for other programs out there that I've heard of. It's not as good as 32 bit, but there are still lots of programs that can't open up 32 bit files, but can open up 24 bit files. Rather than spend all that time converting files, I'm going with the greatest common denominator. Besides, soundcards are still 24 bit too.
Logged
Reply #5
«
on:
April 09, 2007, 03:28:21 PM »
beetle
Global Moderator
Member
Posts: 598
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
Quote from: MrHope on November 25, 2006, 08:30:59 PM
I did some research and experimentation and it seems like 24 bit int is the most compatible for the programs that I use and for other programs out there that I've heard of. It's not as good as 32 bit, but there are still lots of programs that can't open up 32 bit files, but can open up 24 bit files. Rather than spend all that time converting files, I'm going with the greatest common denominator. Besides, soundcards are still 24 bit too.
That's fine. Just remember that if you use AA, it will take much longer for you to open your 24-bit int files.
Logged
Reply #6
«
on:
April 10, 2007, 12:36:30 AM »
Graeme
Administrator
Member
Posts: 1784
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
Quote from: MrHope on November 25, 2006, 08:30:59 PM
Besides, soundcards are still 24 bit too.
... and they will remain so. Nobody is ever going to produce 32 bit hardware.
If you are going to be doing a lot of processing, then 32 bit is the way to go in the software.
Logged
Graeme
Some of my music here
Reply #7
«
on:
April 10, 2007, 12:22:21 PM »
alanofoz
Member
Posts: 452
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
Graeme's absolutely right. And when you
must
have 24 bit recordings Audition will easily convert from 32 bit.
Logged
Cheers,
Alan
Bunyip Bush Band
Reply #8
«
on:
April 10, 2007, 08:24:22 PM »
Must_know
Member
Posts: 209
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
Quote from: alanofoz on April 10, 2007, 12:22:21 PM
Graeme's absolutely right. And when you
must
have 24 bit recordings Audition will easily convert from 32 bit.
Alan, Just to clarify and relieve me of some of my confusion, did you mean to say "Audition will convert
to
32"?
I know that a sample rate discrepancy between a sound card setting and an audition session can create synchronization problems during recording and playback. I've experienced this first hand and read about it on this forum. However, does the bit rate factor into this at all?
Out of general curiosity, why doesn't Audition have an option of recording at 24 bit? Forgive me if this is a completely ignorant question.
Logged
http://www.myspace.com/bennissan
Reply #9
«
on:
April 10, 2007, 10:18:49 PM »
SteveG
Administrator
Member
Posts: 8250
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
Quote from: Must_know on April 10, 2007, 08:24:22 PM
Quote from: alanofoz on April 10, 2007, 12:22:21 PM
Graeme's absolutely right. And when you
must
have 24 bit recordings Audition will easily convert from 32 bit.
Alan, Just to clarify and relieve me of some of my confusion, did you mean to say "Audition will convert
to
32"?
I think that what Alan said was quite clear - you process your material in 32-bit in Audition, and if you must have a copy of it for use in other software that can't cope with that, then Audition will convert the material easily
from
its 32-bit form into a 24-bit file.
Quote
I know that a sample rate discrepancy between a sound card setting and an audition session can create synchronization problems during recording and playback. I've experienced this first hand and read about it on this forum. However, does the bit rate factor into this at all?
No - this is simply a synchronisation issue. The bit rates have to be initially identical to synchronise, and the act of synchronisation brings the two clocks into phase. In reality this isn't what happens with audio systems though - an external clock source is used to trigger an internal source to generate sync pulses at the same rate as it is running. This isn't really synchronisation at all, but regeneration. For the sake of simplicity it's referred to as 'synchronising', but as anybody who's ever worked with genlock systems and live TV studios will tell you, it's not the same thing at all!
Quote
Out of general curiosity, why doesn't Audition have an option of recording at 24 bit? Forgive me if this is a completely ignorant question.
It does. 32-bit FP when it is recorded is effectively 24-bit audio, with all of the scaling bits set to zero. There is a bit more to it than this, because it's translated to a different scaling system from a conventional integer one, but fundamentally it's still 24-bit audio that's being recorded - which is why it's not difficult to store it in one of the conventional 24-bit integer formats if required.
Logged
Reply #10
«
on:
April 11, 2007, 03:58:23 PM »
Must_know
Member
Posts: 209
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
I'm clearly lacking some fundamental knowledge in this area. I tried doing some research on this but could not find anything useful. Does anyone know of an online resource that deals with these issues?
I understand that it is possible to process material in audition at 32 bits and then convert it to a lower bit-rate for the purposes of other software. What I don't quite understand is what happens if you record at 16...can you then process at 32 without negative consequences? Conversely, what happens if you record at 32 and process at 16? Audition has modifiable options pertaining to these very scenarios (settings -> multitrack, etc.) and I don't know which options to choose.
Logged
http://www.myspace.com/bennissan
Reply #11
«
on:
April 11, 2007, 05:10:53 PM »
ryclark
Member
Posts: 270
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
See this long Adobe Audition FAQ thread for more discussion about 24 versus 32 bit.
http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?128@@.2ccfa51e
Logged
Reply #12
«
on:
April 11, 2007, 06:15:44 PM »
Must_know
Member
Posts: 209
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
Thanks a lot for the link. I've read it and it has answered many of my questions.
Logged
http://www.myspace.com/bennissan
Reply #13
«
on:
April 12, 2007, 02:08:38 AM »
alanofoz
Member
Posts: 452
Re: Which 32-bit format is better?
Quote from: SteveG on April 10, 2007, 10:18:49 PM
Quote from: Must_know on April 10, 2007, 08:24:22 PM
Quote from: alanofoz on April 10, 2007, 12:22:21 PM
Graeme's absolutely right. And when you
must
have 24 bit recordings Audition will easily convert from 32 bit.
Alan, Just to clarify and relieve me of some of my confusion, did you mean to say "Audition will convert
to
32"?
I think that what Alan said was quite clear - you process your material in 32-bit in Audition, and if you must have a copy of it for use in other software that can't cope with that, then Audition will convert the material easily
from
its 32-bit form into a 24-bit file.
I imagine Steve's answer has cleared up that point.
Logged
Cheers,
Alan
Bunyip Bush Band
Pages:
[
1
]
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Forum Topics
-----------------------------
=> Forum Announcements
=> Forum Suggestions/Remarks
-----------------------------
Audio Software
-----------------------------
=> Adobe Audition 2.0 & 3.0
===> Adobe Audition 3.0
=====> Audition 3.0 Stickies
=====> MIDI
===> Adobe Audition 2.0
=====> Audition 2.0 Stickies
=> Previous Versions
===> Cool Edit 96, 2000, 1.2a
===> Cool Edit 2.0 & 2.1, Audition 1.0 & 1.5
=> Adobe Audition Wish List
=> Third-Party Plugins
-----------------------------
Audio Related
-----------------------------
=> General Audio
=> Radio, TV and Video Production
=> Hardware and Soundcards
=> Recordings Showcase
-----------------------------
Off Topic
-----------------------------
=> OT Posts
=> Polls
Loading...