Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
Thanks everyone for the replies.
Can you use the internal mic to record 10-20 seconds of silence (e.g. put the recorder in a drawer) in 24-bit 96k WAV and attach the file here?
What input level should I use for this test to be useful? Should I max the input level?
2
Vinyl / Re: WSJ asks Why Vinyls Boom Is Over
Last post by ajinfla -
So the data from 1983 is what we need.
We?
3
Can you use the internal mic to record 10-20 seconds of silence (e.g. put the recorder in a drawer) in 24-bit 96k WAV and attach the file here?
4
Quote
I am also aware that on a portable device the effective bit depth of the recording will not come close to 24 bit...

My question is which combination of sample rate and bit depth settings are likely get the most out of what I assume is relatively common ADC hardware?
I think you've pretty-much answered your own question.

From what I understand, even the best ADCs don't achieve 24-bit accuracy.

The "pro standard" is 24/96, and there's no harm in using that.   But, if you're making CDs (16/44.1) there's no reason for going higher than 44.1kHz.   

You do loose resolution if you record leave headroom...  If you record at 16-bits and your peaks only reach -6dB, you're only using 15-bits.  But in reality, you are unlikely to hear any quality loss even if you go to -12dB (or lower).   Don't try to "compromise"...    Clipping is MUCH worse than a little loss of digital resolution!     

I'll agree with half of what KozmoNaut  said.  It's very important to avoid clipping  (Make sure your levels NEVER hit 0dB.)      It's NOT so important to maximize the signal, especially at 24-bits.  Pros often record at around -18dB (at 24-bits).    Live sound levels are rather unpredictable and I'd start to worry if you get above  -6dB.

Mic location is also very important, especially if there is an audience.      Even if there isn't an audience, you'll probably want more direct sound (and less room-sound/reverb) than you hear in the usual seating position...    The amount of reverb that sounds wonderful in a music hall or church, usually sounds "stupid" coming out of a pair of speakers in your living room.

Get a mic stand and whatever stand-adapter you might need, even if you have to improvise something.  You may not be able to find a shock-mount for that recorder, but try to isolate it from any vibrations, and once you're recording the show, don't touch it!

Also if there's an audience, you might want to set-up a 2nd recorder to capture the applause (assuming you're not recording church services).  That could be a laptop, a video recorder, or a phone, etc., and then you can mix-in the appropriate amount of applause in post-production.

And if at all possible, experiment (especially with different mic locations) by recording rehearsals and/or multiple performances.    And once you've "got it right" it's a good idea to record multiple performances (if possible) because stuff does  go wrong!

5
So... a year later, I discover the answer. Shame on me.

This time, I installed the script with no problems and it is excellent! Thanks a lot.
6
Record in the best quality the device can do

The OP is specifically asking about what combination is best. Are you assuming a higher sample rate is always better?
7
General Audio / Help with detecting real 320kbps and FLAC
Last post by GamerX -
I do it with SPEK but how do I detect shelves ?
Please Help.
8
48000 is more than enough. Use 24 bits just to give head room when recording, in case you don't get gain right - but once recorded, normalize it to 16 bits.
9
Vinyl / Re: WSJ asks Why Vinyls Boom Is Over
Last post by botface -
And it's true that classical music lovers were the most enthusiastic early adopters but the main reasons mentioned at the time were a lower noise floor and the ability to play a complete work without having to turn over rather than sound quality itself (though you might consider lower noise a quality improvement). Having said that I'm sure there were many lured by the promised improvements in sound quality

Based on market research undertaken in the first year after launch
Lets see it.

You can put 2 and 2 together:

Here is some historic sales data by format:

http://www.businessinsider.com/recorded-music-sales-by-format-2015-12

And  here is some sales data by genre:

https://datamarket.com/data/set/28ny/us-music-sales-by-genre#!ds=28ny!2rsw=7&display=line

For example, you can see that classical sales were about 3.5  million per year in 1989, and more like 2.3 million  since 2004. The trend seems to be pretty smooth, so future trends and past behavior might be inferred from this data with reasonable reliability.

The information about formats points out that the period of format replacement in terms of CD sales extended from 1989 to 1999 and peaked at about 13 million units per year in 2002-2003.

In 1999 for example, total classical sales were about 3.2 million, and total CD sales were about 13 million.  How classical sales could have been the majority of CD sales seems problematical, to say the least. 

CD sales have exceeded classical sales since around 1991.

In terms of availability, in the early 1980s one could see a store's entire CD collection in a glace, and my recollection that the classical titles were as a rule less than 20% of what I saw.

It stands to reason that the far more conservative classical purchasers were likely to be late adopters of technological change. 

Media purchasing trends are known to vary strongly between the US and UK for example, but since the whole UK is only the size (geographic, population, economics) of one of our larger states of which we have 50, US sales are always the 500 pound gorilla in the room.





Thanks. However, I was talking about early adopters. So the data from 1983 is what we need. I was also talking about the UK market which may have handled the launch differently
10
Record in the best quality the device can do, provided you have enough space. Make sure the input level gain is correct so you maximize the signal level without clipping. You can always downsample and reduce bit depth later.