Re: OT: Recording equipment

[Mark Hamburg <mark_hamburg@baymoon.com>]

Thanks. That had been one of the theories I had contemplated. One catch,
however, is that I suspect my existing DAT deck is only 16-bit. What I'd
like to have is something a bit lighterweight to run during a session than
firing up my computer. Both the SP-808 and the DAT meet that standard but
both are 16-bit and both suffer from inadequate limiting.

Mark

on 12/7/02 11:18 AM, The CA4 Organisation at jl@ca4.org wrote:

> 
> If you convert to digital with a reasonably good 24-bit converter
> will have a larger dynamic range than any preceeding analog stuff can
> reproduce.
> 
> This means you should not be concerned with recording "hot" at all.
> Recording hot is what you do with analog equipment and is a valid
> technique there.
> 
> I typically record so peaks are -16 to -18dBFS (that is 18dB below
> digital full-scale). As 24bit gives 144dB dynamic range this means
> that the noise level of any analog equipment will still be well above
> the digital noise level. And leaving 16/18dB of headroom allows you
> to do any post-processing with a very reduced risk of overload.
> 
> Note that even the best 24-bit converters seldom have an analog
> dynamic range anywhere near 120dB.
> 
> If you are concerned with keeping every musical nuance intact then
> make sure that any later bit-reduction to 16-bit (CD, MP3, whatever)
> is done with only the best dithering algorithms (POW-r or UV-22).