 |
VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD! Established November 10, 2004
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
D Voice Been Here Awhile

Joined: 26 Jun 2010 Posts: 232
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:47 am Post subject: saving and exporting/importing WAV and other files |
|
|
For various reasons, I have been recording and doing quick edits in one application, saving, and then finishing up in another. I have been saving the raw or rough edited dry files in 16-bit 44.1khz WAV, and opening it up in another (32-bit float, 48kb). But it occurs to me that maybe this is pointless. (Generally files are sent from the second application as either 16-bit/44.1khz WAV or .mp3 at 44.1khz. occasionally 48khz.)
1. Am I losing something? Is there any (dis)advantage to opening and work on something at the higher bit depth and rate when it was already saved at the lower rate?
2. Would there be any advantage to save the WAV files from the first application at 24-bit or 32-bit floating point, and open those in the new application?
Last edited by D Voice on Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:18 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
heyguido MMD

Joined: 31 Aug 2011 Posts: 2507 Location: RDU, the Geek Capitol of the South
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're not losing something.... You're gaining unwanted digital artifacts created by upconverting from a lesser source. Stop.
Your best course of action is to record in your target file type.
Your OPTIMUM solution is to find one piece of software that will do it all.
I'm willing to bet that one or the other of the two you have will do it.... You just haven't learned how yet. _________________ Don Brookshire
"Wait.... They wanna PAY me for this?" |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
agettig Contributor IV

Joined: 14 Sep 2010 Posts: 111 Location: Portage, MI
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think there is any advantage to editing it at the higher rate because it's doing some kind of resampling to open at the higher rate and probably adding artifacts you don't want.
If anything, record at the higher rate and then downsample for delivery. Using your 48k example, you might record at 24 bit/48k and then save at a lower bit rate for delivery. If you really need to go back and forth between a s, pick a setting and stick with it. Also, mp3's are lossy and not a good file format for what you are doing. Use wav or aiff.
Better still, see if you can do everything you need to do in one a . It will save you time and sanity.
99% of my stuff is done at 16/44.1 unless the client specifically asks for something else. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Jason Huggins The Gates of Troy

Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Posts: 1846 Location: In the souls of a million jeans
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Recording at a higher bit rate (24-bit instead of 16-bit) gives you a bit more headroom. As for higher sample rate, you can record at the rate you plan to deliver. I personally record everything at 44.1khz (that is kilohertz by the way, not kilobits).
I you are using Garage Band, it won't do the conversions the way you want. Download Audacity or Studio One Free. They will both do what you need, and Much better than Garage Band. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
D Voice Been Here Awhile

Joined: 26 Jun 2010 Posts: 232
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jason Huggins wrote: | Recording at a higher bit rate (24-bit instead of 16-bit) gives you a bit more headroom. As for higher sample rate, you can record at the rate you plan to deliver. I personally record everything at 44.1khz (that is kilohertz by the way, not kilobits).
If you are using Garage Band, it won't do the conversions the way you want. Download Audacity or Studio One Free. They will both do what you need, and Much better than Garage Band. |
Yes, thanks Jason, indeed I meant khz- I edited above to correct that,
OK, full disclosure: the thing is, I often record on one computer (my quietest, yet with the least amount of RAM) and edit or mixdown on another (more powerful, but noisier one). I also sometimes have files from the Zoom H4N.
I happen to prefer Audacity (2.x) for the first stage of recording and initial edits because:
a) it is installed/updated on every computer I have
b) I work much faster on Audacity- record, retake and edit- (especially after learning to use the Z and C hot keys, etc.)
c) I prefer the NR algorithm on Audacity
Yet I prefer AA for the EQing, filters, and other processing (Truth be told, I only have version 1.5).
I have been able to get Audacity to record in 24 bit (with the ASIO drivers); and discovered there is an Export setting "other uncompressed files" which allows WAV files in 24 bit, 32-bit and 64-bit floating point, etc. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|