East west orchestra 16 or 24 bit and other questions

[lindpop]

I have EW gold 16bit. I wonder about your experience who has upgraded to 24bit?
Is it worth the money?
Or maybe better spend money to buy the close mic?

I don't no if it matters but, some tracks in my projects are 16bit others are24bit. I use to export in 24 bit. Is that good for the 16bit tracks?
It's not until recently I thought about it. It should be best to have everything in same bit I guess.
How do you do?

Another thing is from vst - synth's like Sylenth1. Do they produce the bit rate I decide?
I couldn't find info on Lennards (Sylenth1) homesite.
Hope someone can help to bring some light.

[lindpop]

I got answer regarding Sylenth1. The synth export it in the resolution one export it in up to 32bit.

[fullbirdmusic]

Using 24-bit samples is better than the 16-bit samples in that it gives you more dynamic range and, to me, sounds "deeper" and more rich.

It doesn't matter that some samples you use are 16-bit and you export in 24-bit, but I wouldn't go back and forth on the same file. You should probably only render it from 16-bit to 24-bit once.

I used to use EZ Drummer with 16-bit samples and didn't know what I was missing until I upgraded to Superior 2.0 with 24-bit samples. The drums are easier to mix, sit better in the mix, and sound much better - at least to my ears. Some people claim that you can't hear the difference between 44.1kHz 16-bit and 48kHz 24-bit, but I can definitely hear a difference.

So they probably would be worth buying. I don't have them, so I can't give you too many specifics on that! Just the sound quality of the 2 samplerates. HTH

[ernstinen]

You know, even though I'm an old analog guy, I ALWAYS mix to 24/96. It just sounds deeper and richer, as fullbird said. Higher resolution is always better, to my ears.

That said, you may start shaking your head at my chain when mixing/mastering! I might be nuts, but I mix up all my 24 bit and 16 bit samples together, then run analog outs from my interfaces into a 30-year-old Soundcraft board.

From there, in the analog realm, I go into an Empirical Labs "Fatso," which gives the digital sheen more analog warmth! --- Then, it's analog "in" to an Alesis Masterlink recording digitally at 24/96, and from there a digital transfer into ProTools. Any additional mastering/tweaking is done in PT, and then it goes digitally back into the Masterlink. Whew!!!

I may even do a little more tweaking in the Masterlink. Then I let it convert it back down to CD resolution if I want to burn discs.

I tell ya, this is all trial and error. I've listened VERY carefully to the difference, and going to 24/96 and back to 16/44.1, at least with my gear, definitely sounds better than staying with the CD horseshit resolution. Can't wait until they come out with commercial hi-resolution DVDs or whatever! Some say they're available, but I've yet to hear one.

Happy Trails,

Ern

[lindpop]

Thanks for your answers. I have changed my resolution from 24/41khz to 24/96khz. Hope that will make some difference to the better.
I guess it would be even better with the 24bit EW samples (but it's a lot of money, at least for me).

[mojobone]

I'm okay with 16 bit samples for most stuff, but pianos and cymbals really seem to benefit from the extra bits. (I'm pretty sure this has to do with transients) I hear a measurable benefit from capturing audio at 24 bits, but little to no difference between 44.1 and 48 kHz; I work at either sample rate depending on the destination.