32 bit

firubbi · Post by **firubbi** » Fri Aug 22, 2003 10:48 pm

is it possiable to rec with pulsar2 in 32 bit(cubase sx can handle 32 bit) do you know any 32 bit hardware a/d converter.

ChrisWerner · Post by **ChrisWerner** » Sat Aug 23, 2003 12:25 am

Hi firubbi,
it´s possible.
I record all my things in 32bit.
You have to use the ASIO2-32 Source 64 and the ASIO2-Dest64 modules in your SFP project!

I use the TrueTape mode from my Cubase5.1 to record in 32bit.
32bit is the best choice, because you have a great headroom for your productions.
Once you want to mixdown to a 16bit CD, be sure that you use dithering, the UV-22 is good enough for that.

cheers

firubbi · Post by **firubbi** » Sat Aug 23, 2003 2:01 am

thanks ChrisWerner,
So i might need a 32bit a/d converter? apogee is a good one for this kind'a thing but i didn't find any 32bit converter....they have all 16bit or 24bit! http://www.apogeedigital.com/

do you know where can i find this 32bit hardware a/d converter

thanks

ChrisWerner · Post by **ChrisWerner** » Sat Aug 23, 2003 2:24 am

Hm, maybe I don´t understand why you want a additional 32bit AD converter?
I use a small Behringer mixer to feed the analog input of my Pulsar card with my synth or a mic.
The Pulsar converts the analog signal to the
digital ASIO modules and feeds Cubase with it.
Pulsar works in 32bit and will do the convertion for you.

[ This Message was edited by: ChrisWerner on 2003-08-23 03:26 ]

Post by **garyb** » Sat Aug 23, 2003 3:55 am

for most,32bit is 24bit with 8bit headroom.nice for a little extra clarity when processing effects.not life or death important though.some amazing work has been done with less....

firubbi · Post by **firubbi** » Sat Aug 23, 2003 5:23 am

thanks ChrisWerner i will do what you told me. then again why creamware is selling those A/D converters like *luna 24/96 i/o box or *A16 ultra if pulsar2 can done the job? did you though about it?

**Hey garyb...thanks for that extra 8bit. i got it. so what do you use for conversion? A16 ultra or Apogee stuff?

thanks to both.

Post by **garyb** » Sat Aug 23, 2003 10:33 pm

well,i'd like to get the a16 but it wasn't available when i originally purchased my system.boy,that was YEARS ago....i have a coupla frontier tangos.acceptable.i'll update eventually......

you know,the work i'm presently doing all ends up 16bit 44.1khz on a cd.24bit is more than acceptable.grammys are made at no better resolution.......

for dvd...hmm,maybe 24/96 ,maybe better...film?what's the budget?

[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2003-08-23 23:37 ]

firubbi · Post by **firubbi** » Sun Aug 24, 2003 12:41 am

[quote]
On 2003-08-23 23:33, garyb wrote:
grammys are made at no better resolution.......

yes i agree with that. music should be more powerfull then other thing. all those classic bands had done those amaizing songs with 8tr analog 1" spool.
but hey did you hear "Corrs"? what'a fantastic output!!!!! vocal, harmony part, snare.... acoustic guitar.... it's so clean!!
and how did that happen? all those extra clarity has to be done with ssl or nave. and with world class preamp...so so....

it might not possiable to do that kind'a production with pulsar or sp(he..he..) but i/we want to reach as closer as possiable BUT how??

Post by **garyb** » Sun Aug 24, 2003 1:41 am

well yes,with sfp no problem.you'll also need great mics and mic pres and great CABLES(forgotten often),you'll need a GREAT room,great ears and most of all,knowledge and experience.

keep working at it and i'm sure you'll do wonderful things......

samplaire · Post by **samplaire** » Sun Aug 24, 2003 6:38 pm

On 2003-08-23 23:33, garyb wrote:
well,i'd like to get the a16 but it wasn't available when i originally purchased my system.boy,that was YEARS ago....i have a coupla frontier tangos.acceptable.i'll update eventually......

you know,the work i'm presently doing all ends up 16bit 44.1khz on a cd.24bit is more than acceptable.grammys are made at no better resolution.......

sorry for being OT: Gary, your language is sooo sweet

I wish I spoke Polish as you write English

No joking

[ This Message was edited by: samplaire on 2003-08-24 19:39 ]

Post by **garyb** » Sun Aug 24, 2003 7:22 pm

doh..........

Shayne White · Post by **Shayne White** » Sun Aug 24, 2003 11:15 pm

Chris,

Why in the world would you go to all the trouble of recording at 32-bit when you're using TrueTape??? Any added fidelity 32-bit would give you is going to be lost when you're putting everything through "Tape"! They're mutually exclusive goals!

Shayne

ChrisWerner · Post by **ChrisWerner** » Mon Aug 25, 2003 4:33 am

Hi Shanye, I can explain why I use the TrueTape. True Tape saves me the use of a compressor to boost the volume from an extern signal(out of VST). When I route my Synth,CW stuff or whatever through TrueTape I can raise the volume in a very easy way until it begins to distort when I like. Then I add a comp for the pressure only and my extern signal is nearly ready for mastering. Maybe stupid but I like the easy way when I work.

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Mon Aug 25, 2003 11:32 am

I don't think it is stupid when we leasten to the quality of your masters, so it works and this is the point...

All the rest are just people's words...

firubbi · Post by **firubbi** » Tue Aug 26, 2003 1:07 pm

anyone use sonar 2.2?
hey samplaire, you are from Chopin country!!
my all time favorite piano composser.

Shayne White · Post by **Shayne White** » Sun Aug 31, 2003 3:28 pm

Yeah, I use Sonar 2.2. It only does 24-bit recording, not 32-bit, and it doesn't have any TrueTape inputs. But my method is to record everything as clear and pristine as possible, with no tubes or tapes, and add whatever grungy stuff you want afterward.

Shayne

firubbi · Post by **firubbi** » Mon Sep 01, 2003 10:40 am

hello Shayne White,
there is pc tuning website (www.musicxp.net)which was recommended by Steinberg. and this tuning tips really helps sx running with low porcessing power. i had tried this.
But it didn't help cakewalk sonar to reduce processing power. i have done a test to both sx1.6 and sonar2.2 and the result is (view from windows task manager)sx is showing 20% uses of processing power while sonar is using 100%(maybe more)

So Shayne we might loss audio quality working with sonar without any cakewalk tuning. did you give a thought about that?

thanks

spoimala · Post by **spoimala** » Mon Sep 01, 2003 10:58 am

Hmm.. as marcuspocus seems not to notice this thread, I'll say his words:
"If you want good audio quality and even 32bit, use VDAT. It's superior to any other recorder"

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Mon Sep 01, 2003 12:13 pm

Ya man!!!!

Unbeatable

spoimala · Post by **spoimala** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:31 am

You welcome