96KHz/24bit - apparently we're wasting our time....

[The Tasmanian]

Anyone running a Mytek 8x192?
Mine is DSD ready by just adding a card.
Ive been looking at the DSD sign on it for 5 years waiting for the card which is now available.
Apparently now I can run it as 8 channels of DSD - Good stuff!

[Thirteen]

I have the Korg DSD recorder also. It is the best sounding digital recorder/reproducer that I have ever heard.

[Drumstruck]

Here's a 53 page forum argument on this very topic that lasted two years on prosoundweb.

http://repforums.prosoundweb.com/index. ... 128.0.html

It features such luminaries as Dan Lavry and George Massenburg, who take care to exchange numerous professional pleasantries with each other before proceeding to argue like screaming cats.

Regardless, I found it interesting, so I thought I'd share. I'm only up to page 10, so I can't speak for the remaining 43 pages.

There was a similar thread where Bob Katz and the Apogee head dude got stuck into one another about clocking (might be the same thread - I couldn't take 53 pages again).

[jkhuri44]

^ at that point...you could just stfu and go make some music, bickering f*ckers.

[tunetown]

I always record 24bit/96k (at low levels) to a 24 channel API DSM. I then use the console tape out to record the stereo files to a Korg MR1000 DSD 1 bit 5.6Mhz. On playback the Korg sounds just like the console mix.

This works best for me

[rick]

I have had this conversation with George massenburg in my car one day

George ..
"Rick... you really need to rethink your thoughts on sample rates"

Rick
"ok sure.. as soon as you tell me how the melody goes in the all the songs on itunes called samplerate "

George
" you crack me up .. you should come to the next aes in new york I will put you on the panel with me .. we need you "

[Hookemeister]

.
Recorded at 192kHz/24bit in 99% of the best studios around the world.

Listened to by 99% of the world on compressed audio formats... AAC, MP3 thru cheap headphones.

So here's a little lab test for somebody out there to do.

Master a track at 192kHz/24bit, then master it at 44kHz/16bit.

Now encode those 2 tracks via iTunes default setting of 128kbps onto an iPod.

Finally... listen to the tracks on the iPod and let me know if you can hear any difference between the 192kHz/24bit and the 44kHz/16bit mix.

[geofflee]

The 'default iTunes setting' is 256 kbps, which vastly superior to 128. It's listenable, for a start!

[ChrisW]

I think the current consumer audio standard is a bit of a red herring.
You don't want to work at a lower quality level just because some of your audience listen at a lower quality audio standard.
When stereo first came along the vast majority of the public were listening on mono playback.
However, now we can enjoy those (recorded for stereo) Hendrix, Stones and Beatles albums in stereo.
What is practical and worthwhile.
For me it's 96khz.
If I was one of the top studios in the world I might be recording at 192khz.

Just on iTunes.
I uploaded some music at 'apple lossless' to my iPod. Listened to it for a couple of years, then forgot about it. Recently I've been downloading mp3's at the basic format. Listening to them and they sound fine. But the other day I went back to listen to a few of my 'apple lossless' tracks again and the quality difference was obvious. I really couldn't believe my ears.
Same iPod, different audio formats, big difference in quality (IMHO).

[The Tasmanian]

Yeah 256 and Apple lossless is not too horrible.
But we must look forward with the quality of our work - there is no point in not recording and mixing at 96k just because of the MP3's of the day sound like shit.
Things will get better - and as it does its we can have higher quality mixes ready to take advantage of future quality increases.
No way will I reduce the quality of how I make a record just to pander to the shitty MP3 format.
I cannot be bothered to do the 44/192 itunes comparison - whats the point?
Its not going to change the way I work so its a futile comparison for me unless I think MP3's will forever be the only format/quality available in the future

Its all about the best quality work we can muster today - and leaning into the future.

[NYMo]

Just saw my quote from 2009 !

I still believe multitrack dsd will become a reality....well it actually is in a Genex box !
But I think one day it will be universal .

As for my Pt 10 quote...they released that a bit early...should have been a 9. Xx release !

Reminds me of when someone from Korg was telling me about a synth engine they were developing called Oasys ...
And that was in 1989 !

Cheers

[Chris H]

Don't know if this has been covered before here but from what I have read, DSD is great for recording but not so for editing and processing plugins etc. So as a multytrack recorder to be used with an outboard mixing setup it would be a big step up sonically from PCM digital. Some DSD machines are better than others, the one recommended to me was the Korg MR 1000.