That's a bummer.
Sometimes I feel like switching daws because they ignore their fanbase.
I bet you they wouldn't have allowed VSTs if they didn't think it was a good business move.
That's a bummer.
32 bit export is very very low on the list of features that people want(or need)EggplantTown wrote: ↑20 Jul 2018That's a bummer.
Sometimes I feel like switching daws because they ignore their fanbase.
I bet you they wouldn't have allowed VSTs if they didn't think it was a good business move.
Isn't any time a company adds features to software a business move? New features add new customers and retain old ones. Something like 32 bit though, may come eventually, but considering there's no real benefit to having the option (as we've explained), it's probably low on the priority list. There are plenty of overall user feature requests they have added though. This thread, carried over from the Propellerhead forums, has quite a few things that have been added. viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7264556&hilit=death ... usand+cuts. I wouldn't say they ignore their customer base, but they definitely do things their own way.EggplantTown wrote: ↑20 Jul 2018That's a bummer.
Sometimes I feel like switching daws because they ignore their fanbase.
I bet you they wouldn't have allowed VSTs if they didn't think it was a good business move.
I dont know what it is nor what it is good for, but now i want that!
That's an interesting comment, selig, and seems to be consistent with the blog post that was linked upthread: https://theproaudiofiles.com/6-db-headr ... explained/
As a separate question, no there is no other reason.househoppin09 wrote: ↑30 Jul 2018That's an interesting comment, selig, and seems to be consistent with the blog post that was linked upthread: https://theproaudiofiles.com/6-db-headr ... explained/
Is there, in fact, any actual reason to bother shooting for 3-6 dB of headroom on a mix? Even when the mastering engineer explicitly asks for that much headroom, there's no reason for them to actually care, as long as none of the peaks are getting lost... right? I mean, yes, when using a -12 dB reference level, it's likely that the mix will naturally end up sitting in that -6 to -3 range. But if it ends up outside that range for whatever reason, is there any reason why that would ever be worth bothering to correct for, as long as there's absolutely no clipping occurring?
Well said - also worth noting the dynamic range of a 24 bit audio files exceeds the threshold of pain for humans, assuming you set your levels so you can hear the quietest signals (and assuming you are listening in an anechoic environment).chaosroyale wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018Just to reiterate that 32-bit export IS the workaround. Basically it is "idiot insurance" for audio files that have been exported much much much too hot. Bear in mind that 24-bit files already have a signal-to-noise ratio of about 144dB, enough to record the full dynamic range of an orchestra and still have 30dB of headroom before clipping. Of course no playback system comes close to that performance, unless maybe you have a spare Saturn V engine as a speaker cone.
For any non-professionals worrying about the sound quality of your files, 16 bit 44.1 lossless is enough for playback in any real-world environment, and 24 bit is enough for professional use as long as you leave enough headroom. 32-bit float is for calculations inside DAWs and for when you can't trust the mixing engineer not to be drunk.
Thanks for the confirmation on that. I did understand your original comment; my focus here isn't so much on "what's the point of asking for so much headroom" from the mastering engineer's perspective, because that certainly makes sense. It's kind of like setting the speed limit to 55 mph so that people will hopefully keep it under 75 mph, right? My focus is on the question of "do I really need to leave that much headroom", from the mixing/production side. Sounds like the answer is a pretty firm no, as common sense would suggest. In my own productions, if I'm diligent about making sure my mixes aren't clipping in any way, shape, or form, there's really no particular advantage to staying in that -6 to -3 range, right? (Leaving aside that it happens naturally when using ideal reference levels, etc.)selig wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018As a separate question, no there is no other reason.househoppin09 wrote: ↑30 Jul 2018
That's an interesting comment, selig, and seems to be consistent with the blog post that was linked upthread: https://theproaudiofiles.com/6-db-headr ... explained/
Is there, in fact, any actual reason to bother shooting for 3-6 dB of headroom on a mix? Even when the mastering engineer explicitly asks for that much headroom, there's no reason for them to actually care, as long as none of the peaks are getting lost... right? I mean, yes, when using a -12 dB reference level, it's likely that the mix will naturally end up sitting in that -6 to -3 range. But if it ends up outside that range for whatever reason, is there any reason why that would ever be worth bothering to correct for, as long as there's absolutely no clipping occurring?
But maybe you misunderstood my original comment - My suggestion is that there IS a good reason for asking for that much headroom, and it’s likely because when they say “as long as there’s no clipping”, there is still clipping in some cases. Same for asking for 32 bit files, because no matter how many times you say “no clipping”, there will still be clipping by some folks. I’ve seen it myself, and the response has been “but there was only a clip or two” or similar.
There would be no other reason besides clipping for an ME to ask for 32 bit files, and likely no other logical reason to ask for 3-6 dB headroom.
Well said! This is a clear and wonderfully concise way to look at it (not to mention hilarious, I can't wait for Saturn V engines to start showing up on Reverb.com). Out of curiosity, what's your take on when 16-bit wouldn't be enough for professional use? I've found that, assuming proper dithering, the truncation only seems to matter with material that has a massive emphasis on very quiet acoustic passages, and even then the difference is subtle enough that nothing too terrible happens at 16-bit. It may not be ideal, but I find 16-bit broadly usable even for professional purposes. Interested in any thoughts you (or anyone) might have on that.chaosroyale wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018Just to reiterate that 32-bit export IS the workaround. Basically it is "idiot insurance" for audio files that have been exported much much much too hot. Bear in mind that 24-bit files already have a signal-to-noise ratio of about 144dB, enough to record the full dynamic range of an orchestra and still have 30dB of headroom before clipping. Of course no playback system comes close to that performance, unless maybe you have a spare Saturn V engine as a speaker cone.
For any non-professionals worrying about the sound quality of your files, 16 bit 44.1 lossless is enough for playback in any real-world environment, and 24 bit is enough for professional use as long as you leave enough headroom. 32-bit float is for calculations inside DAWs and for when you can't trust the mixing engineer not to be drunk.
You can be diligent and spend the time required to get very close to clipping without going over, or you can just mix and enjoy the artistic part and leave a few dB headroom. I choose the latter, leaving about 3 dB on a typical mix. Sure I could go the extra mile for the extra dB, but honestly I can’t justify it - what’s the advantage?househoppin09 wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018Thanks for the confirmation on that. I did understand your original comment; my focus here isn't so much on "what's the point of asking for so much headroom" from the mastering engineer's perspective, because that certainly makes sense. It's kind of like setting the speed limit to 55 mph so that people will hopefully keep it under 75 mph, right? My focus is on the question of "do I really need to leave that much headroom", from the mixing/production side. Sounds like the answer is a pretty firm no, as common sense would suggest. In my own productions, if I'm diligent about making sure my mixes aren't clipping in any way, shape, or form, there's really no particular advantage to staying in that -6 to -3 range, right? (Leaving aside that it happens naturally when using ideal reference levels, etc.)selig wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018
As a separate question, no there is no other reason.
But maybe you misunderstood my original comment - My suggestion is that there IS a good reason for asking for that much headroom, and it’s likely because when they say “as long as there’s no clipping”, there is still clipping in some cases. Same for asking for 32 bit files, because no matter how many times you say “no clipping”, there will still be clipping by some folks. I’ve seen it myself, and the response has been “but there was only a clip or two” or similar.
There would be no other reason besides clipping for an ME to ask for 32 bit files, and likely no other logical reason to ask for 3-6 dB headroom.
Ah beautiful 24 bit audio.selig wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018Well said - also worth noting the dynamic range of a 24 bit audio files exceeds the threshold of pain for humans, assuming you set your levels so you can hear the quietest signals (and assuming you are listening in an anechoic environment).chaosroyale wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018Just to reiterate that 32-bit export IS the workaround. Basically it is "idiot insurance" for audio files that have been exported much much much too hot. Bear in mind that 24-bit files already have a signal-to-noise ratio of about 144dB, enough to record the full dynamic range of an orchestra and still have 30dB of headroom before clipping. Of course no playback system comes close to that performance, unless maybe you have a spare Saturn V engine as a speaker cone.
For any non-professionals worrying about the sound quality of your files, 16 bit 44.1 lossless is enough for playback in any real-world environment, and 24 bit is enough for professional use as long as you leave enough headroom. 32-bit float is for calculations inside DAWs and for when you can't trust the mixing engineer not to be drunk.
Going beyond that (while tempting in some cases) simply doesn’t make much sense!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests