32 bit depth exporting coming soon?

This forum is for discussing Propellerhead's music software. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

Quite surprised that reason doesn't have 32 bit depth exporting yet, it's pretty much the standard for most daws now and is way better than 24 bit.

Haven't seen any threads on this, has Propellerhead mentioned anything about it?

Jmax
Posts: 496
Joined: 03 Apr 2015

19 Jul 2018

16 sounds fine to me

jimmyklane
Posts: 736
Joined: 16 Apr 2018

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
19 Jul 2018
Quite surprised that reason doesn't have 32 bit depth exporting yet, it's pretty much the standard for most daws now and is way better than 24 bit.

Haven't seen any threads on this, has Propellerhead mentioned anything about it?
In what way would you say that “32 but is way better”? It is true that most people in blind tests cannot tell the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit audio, and 32 bit export will eventually be decimated to at MOST 24-bit audio for consumers. Can you hear a difference? Are you using many decibels of dynamic range (more than 48dB) for your music?

These are serious questions/comments. I do not troll.
DAW: Reason 10,

SAMPLERS: Akai MPC 2000, E-mu SP1200, E-Mu e5000Ultra, Ensoniq EPS 16+, Akai S950, Maschine

SYNTHS: Mostly classic Polysynths and more modern Monosynths. All are mostly food for my samplers!

www.soundcloud.com/jimmyklane

User avatar
Loque
Posts: 3842
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

19 Jul 2018

I like the idea of high resolution export, even I do not need it. But tbh, most ppl cannot hear the difference between 96khz 24bit audio and a 128mbit mp3. First, they do not have the equipment, second they do not know how such music would sound. A lot of stuff i hear in the current pop music is such a crap - no bass, no transients, no dynamics, impossible to differentiate instruments, all mixed for mobile phones on 128mbit mp3...
:reason: 10, Win10 64Bit.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

The only way I’m aware of that 32 bits is “way better” is that you cannot clip (which is only better if you’re someone who pays no attention to levels). Even with the lowly 24 bit format you’ve probably got 8 more bits (48 dB) than you’ll every likely need. That translates into being able to lower you highest peak 48dB below clipping and still capture your original signal just fine.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

Loque wrote:I like the idea of high resolution export, even I do not need it. But tbh, most ppl cannot hear the difference between 96khz 24bit audio and a 128mbit mp3. First, they do not have the equipment, second they do not know how such music would sound. A lot of stuff i hear in the current pop music is such a crap - no bass, no transients, no dynamics, impossible to differentiate instruments, all mixed for mobile phones on 128mbit mp3...
I am often confused with the term “high resolution”, since there is no parameter in digital audio for “resolution”. As Normen recently reminded us, sample rate determines frequency response, and bit depth determines dynamic range.

Increasing the bit depth depth and sample rate allow you to capture more data, but not necessarily more signal (definitely not more useful signal for the most part). And certainly not more resolution, which is to say that 1 bit ALWAYS equals 6dB dynamic range, and higher sample rates do absolutely nothing to affect the “resolution” of the lower frequencies.



Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

jimmyklane wrote:
19 Jul 2018
EggplantTown wrote:
19 Jul 2018
Quite surprised that reason doesn't have 32 bit depth exporting yet, it's pretty much the standard for most daws now and is way better than 24 bit.

Haven't seen any threads on this, has Propellerhead mentioned anything about it?
In what way would you say that “32 but is way better”? It is true that most people in blind tests cannot tell the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit audio, and 32 bit export will eventually be decimated to at MOST 24-bit audio for consumers. Can you hear a difference? Are you using many decibels of dynamic range (more than 48dB) for your music?

These are serious questions/comments. I do not troll.
It's not all about hearing. It's about quality, and yes your peaks getting chopped off like it's a limiter is audible (sometimes not very, but it's bad enough and we need a solution, which there is (32 bit depth export)).

Also how can I compare 32 bit vs 24 bit if I only use reason and I can't export at 32 bit? Instead I will trust people with experience and knowledge and who do this for a living.

Ask a mastering engineer why 32 bit should be the set standard. Here's a good article: https://theproaudiofiles.com/6-db-headr ... explained/

The article will demonstrate how 32 bit depth exportation can preserve peaks and even though it looks like the waveform is getting chopped off, the peaks are actually still there and you can get them back by turning down the waveform in volume. That is impossible with 24 bit.

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

Jmax wrote:
19 Jul 2018
16 sounds fine to me
I don't see how that's a good argument.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
jimmyklane wrote:
19 Jul 2018
In what way would you say that “32 but is way better”? It is true that most people in blind tests cannot tell the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit audio, and 32 bit export will eventually be decimated to at MOST 24-bit audio for consumers. Can you hear a difference? Are you using many decibels of dynamic range (more than 48dB) for your music?

These are serious questions/comments. I do not troll.
It's not all about hearing. It's about quality, and yes your peaks getting chopped off like it's a limiter is audible (sometimes not very, but it's bad enough and we need a solution, which there is (32 bit depth export)).

Also how can I compare 32 bit vs 24 bit if I only use reason and I can't export at 32 bit? Instead I will trust people with experience and knowledge and who do this for a living.

Ask a mastering engineer why 32 bit should be the set standard. Here's a good article: https://theproaudiofiles.com/6-db-headr ... explained/

The article will demonstrate how 32 bit depth exportation can preserve peaks and even though it looks like the waveform is getting chopped off, the peaks are actually still there and you can get them back by turning down the waveform in volume. That is impossible with 24 bit.
Exactly - OR, you could lower the level before exporting since you have WAY more dynamic range than you need with 24 bit. But the “sound” isn’t any better with more dynamic range, once you have enough to capture your source and for your target destination. 144dB dynamic range is over TWICE what was possible using analog tape, and a lot of great sounding records were made that way…just saying.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
The only way I’m aware of that 32 bits is “way better” is that you cannot clip (which is only better if you’re someone who pays no attention to levels). Even with the lowly 24 bit format you’ve probably got 8 more bits (48 dB) than you’ll every likely need. That translates into being able to lower you highest peak 48dB below clipping and still capture your original signal just fine.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Yes great argument friend.

"32 bit is for noobs".

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
The only way I’m aware of that 32 bits is “way better” is that you cannot clip (which is only better if you’re someone who pays no attention to levels). Even with the lowly 24 bit format you’ve probably got 8 more bits (48 dB) than you’ll every likely need. That translates into being able to lower you highest peak 48dB below clipping and still capture your original signal just fine.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Yes great argument friend.

"32 bit is for noobs".
If you say so, But I never said THAT - plenty of “pros” pay no attention to levels. Like we both said, the only advantage of 32 bit export is that levels above 0 dBFS won’t clip.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
EggplantTown wrote:
It's not all about hearing. It's about quality, and yes your peaks getting chopped off like it's a limiter is audible (sometimes not very, but it's bad enough and we need a solution, which there is (32 bit depth export)).

Also how can I compare 32 bit vs 24 bit if I only use reason and I can't export at 32 bit? Instead I will trust people with experience and knowledge and who do this for a living.

Ask a mastering engineer why 32 bit should be the set standard. Here's a good article: https://theproaudiofiles.com/6-db-headr ... explained/

The article will demonstrate how 32 bit depth exportation can preserve peaks and even though it looks like the waveform is getting chopped off, the peaks are actually still there and you can get them back by turning down the waveform in volume. That is impossible with 24 bit.
Exactly - OR, you could lower the level before exporting since you have WAY more dynamic range than you need with 24 bit. But the “sound” isn’t any better with more dynamic range, once you have enough to capture your source and for your target destination. 144dB dynamic range is over TWICE what was possible using analog tape, and a lot of great sounding records were made that way…just saying.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
So 32 bit is the recommended bit depth to export at by every mastering engineer, literally every DAW except Reason has it implemented, but you are going to go ahead and say "NO! You are all wrong, it's unnecessary and there are ways to work around it!"?

Maybe the extra flexibility wouldn't be such a problem, I don't see why you are so against it when it has good benefits.

User avatar
aeox
Posts: 1585
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
Exactly - OR, you could lower the level before exporting since you have WAY more dynamic range than you need with 24 bit. But the “sound” isn’t any better with more dynamic range, once you have enough to capture your source and for your target destination. 144dB dynamic range is over TWICE what was possible using analog tape, and a lot of great sounding records were made that way…just saying.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
So 32 bit is the recommended bit depth to export at by every mastering engineer, literally every DAW except Reason has it implemented, but you are going to go ahead and say "NO! You are all wrong, it's unnecessary and there are ways to work around it!"?

Maybe the extra flexibility wouldn't be such a problem, I don't see why you are so against it when it has good benefits.
Yea. Don't clip the master :)

Sent from my Nokia 3310 using Tapatalk


User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
Exactly - OR, you could lower the level before exporting since you have WAY more dynamic range than you need with 24 bit. But the “sound” isn’t any better with more dynamic range, once you have enough to capture your source and for your target destination. 144dB dynamic range is over TWICE what was possible using analog tape, and a lot of great sounding records were made that way…just saying.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
So 32 bit is the recommended bit depth to export at by every mastering engineer, literally every DAW except Reason has it implemented, but you are going to go ahead and say "NO! You are all wrong, it's unnecessary and there are ways to work around it!"?

Maybe the extra flexibility wouldn't be such a problem, I don't see why you are so against it when it has good benefits.
Oddly, I keep agreeing with you and you keep escalating the discussion!
;)


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
EggplantTown wrote:
So 32 bit is the recommended bit depth to export at by every mastering engineer, literally every DAW except Reason has it implemented, but you are going to go ahead and say "NO! You are all wrong, it's unnecessary and there are ways to work around it!"?

Maybe the extra flexibility wouldn't be such a problem, I don't see why you are so against it when it has good benefits.
Oddly, I keep agreeing with you and you keep escalating the discussion!
;)


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Well you are saying that 24 bit is plenty.

We still get good benefits for going to 32 bit so why is it not the standard? it makes sense. I could see the argument for 64 bit, but 32 bit still has good benefits.

Propellerheads have a talented team, I'm sure they could do it in no time :P

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

aeox wrote:
19 Jul 2018
EggplantTown wrote:
So 32 bit is the recommended bit depth to export at by every mastering engineer, literally every DAW except Reason has it implemented, but you are going to go ahead and say "NO! You are all wrong, it's unnecessary and there are ways to work around it!"?

Maybe the extra flexibility wouldn't be such a problem, I don't see why you are so against it when it has good benefits.
Yea. Don't clip the master :)

Sent from my Nokia 3310 using Tapatalk
Definitely not :P

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018


Oddly, I keep agreeing with you and you keep escalating the discussion!



Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Well you are saying that 24 bit is plenty.

We still get good benefits for going to 32 bit so why is it not the standard? it makes sense. I could see the argument for 64 bit, but 32 bit still has good benefits.

Propellerheads have a talented team, I'm sure they could do it in no time
There is one benefit, and that is only going to come into play if you don’t pay attention to your levels and exceed 0 dBFS. Otherwise there will be absolutely no difference in audio quality with a 32 vs 24 bit (and possibly 16 bit) master. I’m not aware of any advantage to having your levels go above 0dBFS.

And yes, 24 bit is plenty. Some even say 16 bit is plenty for a master. Do you need more than 96dB dynamic range for your music?

The advantage with 24 bit over 16 bit is you can record at lower levels and not worry about clipping, and thus leave headroom for mixing as well.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
EggplantTown wrote:
Well you are saying that 24 bit is plenty.

We still get good benefits for going to 32 bit so why is it not the standard? it makes sense. I could see the argument for 64 bit, but 32 bit still has good benefits.

Propellerheads have a talented team, I'm sure they could do it in no time
There is one benefit, and that is only going to come into play if you don’t pay attention to your levels and exceed 0 dBFS. Otherwise there will be absolutely no difference in audio quality with a 32 vs 24 bit (and possibly 16 bit) master. I’m not aware of any advantage to having your levels go above 0dBFS.

And yes, 24 bit is plenty. Some even say 16 bit is plenty for a master. Do you need more than 96dB dynamic range for your music?

The advantage with 24 bit over 16 bit is you can record at lower levels and not worry about clipping, and thus leave headroom for mixing as well.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Just because you can work around it doesn't mean that it's useless and that it shouldn't be implemented.

It is one feature that will please everybody and stay as the set standard for a very long time, I don't see why it shouldn't be implemented.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018


There is one benefit, and that is only going to come into play if you don’t pay attention to your levels and exceed 0 dBFS. Otherwise there will be absolutely no difference in audio quality with a 32 vs 24 bit (and possibly 16 bit) master. I’m not aware of any advantage to having your levels go above 0dBFS.

And yes, 24 bit is plenty. Some even say 16 bit is plenty for a master. Do you need more than 96dB dynamic range for your music?

The advantage with 24 bit over 16 bit is you can record at lower levels and not worry about clipping, and thus leave headroom for mixing as well.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Just because you can work around it doesn't mean that it's useless and that it shouldn't be implemented.

It is one feature that will please everybody and stay as the set standard for a very long time, I don't see why it shouldn't be implemented.
I don’t see why it shouldn’t be implemented either, but I wouldn’t begin to speak for anyone but myself.

But even if and when it is implemented I will have no use for it, as my mastering engineer Bob Olhsson has never requested 32 bit files from me. And since I’ve had “don’t clip” drilled into my head for over 40 years now, I don’t see myself needing to undo accidental clipping any time soon…

To be clear, my only point in posting in this thread was to respond to your claim that 32 bit audio was “way better” than 24 bit audio, and I hope I’ve made my point clear?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
EggplantTown wrote:
Just because you can work around it doesn't mean that it's useless and that it shouldn't be implemented.

It is one feature that will please everybody and stay as the set standard for a very long time, I don't see why it shouldn't be implemented.
I don’t see why it shouldn’t be implemented either, but I wouldn’t begin to speak for anyone but myself.

But even if and when it is implemented I will have no use for it, as my mastering engineer Bob Olhsson has never requested 32 bit files from me. And since I’ve had “don’t clip” drilled into my head for over 40 years now, I don’t see myself needing to undo accidental clipping any time soon…

To be clear, my only point in posting in this thread was to respond to your claim that 32 bit audio was “way better” than 24 bit audio, and I hope I’ve made my point clear?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Well 32 bit is still better, your point is that you can work around it. Nobody is arguing with you that you can't, but clearly 32 bit is still superior when exporting.

Also the the music you listen to doesn't get pushed to freaking -4 RMS.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
I don’t see why it shouldn’t be implemented either, but I wouldn’t begin to speak for anyone but myself.

But even if and when it is implemented I will have no use for it, as my mastering engineer Bob Olhsson has never requested 32 bit files from me. And since I’ve had “don’t clip” drilled into my head for over 40 years now, I don’t see myself needing to undo accidental clipping any time soon…

To be clear, my only point in posting in this thread was to respond to your claim that 32 bit audio was “way better” than 24 bit audio, and I hope I’ve made my point clear?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Well 32 bit is still better, your point is that you can work around it. Nobody is arguing with you that you can't, but clearly 32 bit is still superior when exporting.

Also the the music you listen to doesn't get pushed to freaking -4 RMS.
I think you may be trying to correlate bit depth with loudness wars?

OK, I’ll bite: in what way is 32 bit superior when exporting, besides in being able to recover from accidentally going over 0dBFS with the export?

My point is that you automatically “work around it” when you avoid clipping when exporting, which most of us already do, right?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
EggplantTown wrote:
Well 32 bit is still better, your point is that you can work around it. Nobody is arguing with you that you can't, but clearly 32 bit is still superior when exporting.

Also the the music you listen to doesn't get pushed to freaking -4 RMS.
I think you may be trying to correlate bit depth with loudness wars?

OK, I’ll bite: in what way is 32 bit superior when exporting, besides in being able to recover from accidentally going over 0dBFS with the export?

My point is that you automatically “work around it” when you avoid clipping when exporting, which most of us already do, right?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
1) I'm sure having the conversion process not act like a limiter is a good thing.

2) If your mastering engineer ever has any problems, he can just turn it down and the peaks are still there, instead of contacting you to make a miniature change.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
I think you may be trying to correlate bit depth with loudness wars?

OK, I’ll bite: in what way is 32 bit superior when exporting, besides in being able to recover from accidentally going over 0dBFS with the export?

My point is that you automatically “work around it” when you avoid clipping when exporting, which most of us already do, right?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
1) I'm sure having the conversion process not act like a limiter is a good thing.

2) If your mastering engineer ever has any problems, he can just turn it down and the peaks are still there, instead of contacting you to make a miniature change.
1 & 2 are the same thing, right? Just another way to say “don’t clip the master”?

BTW, I’m clarifying only because I don’t want folks to get the impression there is any additional sonic advantage to 32bit file support beyond saving you from clipping.

Requesting 32 bit float files is just the latest incarnation of mastering engineers saying to keep 3-6 dB headroom on mixes, obviously from past experience with folks who clipped their mixes despite begin told not to do so.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

EggplantTown
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Jul 2018

19 Jul 2018

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
EggplantTown wrote:
1) I'm sure having the conversion process not act like a limiter is a good thing.

2) If your mastering engineer ever has any problems, he can just turn it down and the peaks are still there, instead of contacting you to make a miniature change.
1 & 2 are the same thing, right? Just another way to say “don’t clip the master”?

BTW, I’m clarifying only because I don’t want folks to get the impression there is any additional sonic advantage to 32bit file support beyond saving you from clipping.

Requesting 32 bit float files is just the latest incarnation of mastering engineers saying to keep 3-6 dB headroom on mixes, obviously from past experience with folks who clipped their mixes despite begin told not to do so.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Yeah sure 1 and 2 are the same reason, but there's still context. It's a tedious job to have to make a tiny change, re export and send the file again. Why not just 32 bit? Who needs a converter to limit anyway and it's a one time implementation that will last for a very long time and will be competitive with all the other DAWs.

II'm sure mastering engineers prefer 32 bit because they have the option to have more control over it.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7169
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

19 Jul 2018

EggplantTown wrote:
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2018
1 & 2 are the same thing, right? Just another way to say “don’t clip the master”?

BTW, I’m clarifying only because I don’t want folks to get the impression there is any additional sonic advantage to 32bit file support beyond saving you from clipping.

Requesting 32 bit float files is just the latest incarnation of mastering engineers saying to keep 3-6 dB headroom on mixes, obviously from past experience with folks who clipped their mixes despite begin told not to do so.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Yeah sure 1 and 2 are the same reason, but there's still context. It's a tedious job to have to make a tiny change, re export and send the file again. Why not just 32 bit? Who needs a converter to limit anyway and it's a one time implementation that will last for a very long time and will be competitive with all the other DAWs.

II'm sure mastering engineers prefer 32 bit because they have the option to have more control over it.
There is no more control over a properly recorded 24 bit file and a 32 bit floating point file.

Why not just 32 bit? Because Reason currently does not support it, and I’m a realist! And I could equally respond with “why not just not clip in the first place?”.
Which is good advice with working with a DAW that does NOT support 32 bit export, right? ;)

In other words, since Reason doesn’t support 32 bit export, the best advice is to not clip. And if you follow that advice, you’ll never need 32 bit file export (though I’m sure it will eventually be added to the app at some future point).


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

Post Reply
  • Information