to 24bit or 32bit, that is the question

[bobbo]

I just got DP7 yesterday, I've been using DP5.13 for the last 5 years or so. Only big question I have is about the bits. This version allows for 32bit float. Now I did a google search and basically came back with the typical engineer thread where most people are saying different things than each other and in some cases just start arguing with each out.

Have you guys made the switch to 32bit? or staying around 24bit? hd space and processor usage aren't a concern to me. From what I've read (weeding out the arguing and having to combine everyone's independent answers to form my own) It just seems to give more headroom. If that's the case I'll take more headroom please... Any thoughts.

One more question, is there a way I can get access to channel volume from the "tracks screen". With out having to use the mixer or an external fader controller. I saw a buddy of mine do this with his protools HD rig, and I was blown away how convenient that was.

Thanks.

[HCMarkus]

Your converters can do 24 bits at best (in reality probably 21 or 22) so how are you going to use the "headroom" offered by 32 bit recording?

If I recall correctly, the only advantage of 32 bit recording, other than possible compatibility with others using it, is the preservation of all internal dynamic range (DP operates at 32 bits internally) when bouncing tracks within DP.

I record at 44.1 or 48k (CD or Video projects respectively) 24 bits.

[bobbo]

For headroom in the DP. I am aware my all of my interfaces are 24bit max, and I'm not sure if I've seen any 32bit interfaces. Which is why I'm asking the question if anyone has used 32bit since it's now an option in the newer version. If 32bit is pretty much useless, then why the hell is it an option? After researching new gear purchases for the last 3 weeks, I've noticed there's a lot of grey area that has no real single answer to why or how to operate it the settings correctly. I just want to know what advantages it has, if it's going to be more headroom for the files, then that's a win for me, regardless of whether or not my converter is only putting out only 21 or 22bits. If that's really the case, then why would motu waste money adding 32bit float?

I didn't just spend $200 bucks on new DP7 software to basically get DP5 with new changeable color themes for the layout and their version of amp modeling... I want to use the new stuff, new options, and since there's no explanation of the practical differences in the thick motu manual for 16/24/32bit options, I need to see what the DP users have done. I don't want this to turn into every other post I already found online from various other forums about bit rates. I don't care if my interface is only doing 21/22bits, I want to know what benefit selecting 32bit float on the new version of digital performer 7 will give me.

[bobbo]

I just called Motu directly to asked about the 32bit in DP7, and figured it out. Thanks.

[Kubi]

Uh, and the answer was...?

[Gravity Jim]

I'll bet the answer was that 32-bit floating point math and 24-bits of recording depth are two different things, not related or mutually exclusive.

[HCMarkus]

I want to know what benefit selecting 32bit float on the new version of digital performer 7 will give me.

That's why I said:

"the only advantage of 32 bit recording, other than possible compatibility with others using it, is the preservation of all internal dynamic range (DP operates at 32 bits internally) when bouncing tracks within DP."

Did MOTU confim this? Thanks.

[Shooshie]

Every time a thread like this gets started, I think of the numerous threads in the past that quickly devolved into the many participants' misunderstandings of the various contexts in which you find the words 32 bits, 64 bits, 24 bits, 16 bits, and 32 bits fp, or 64 bits fp.

For those who wish to rehash such meandering threads, let me offer this one up as a good one, since provides the accurate truth at some points, and it's not hard to tell when that happens.

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=388149

There is one post in which I attempt to sum up the relevant points and explain the differences in what we can mean by "32 bits."

Here is that post.

And there is an external reference that remains the excellent source of information that it was then.
You'll find that HERE.

I hope this helps.

Shooshie

[Kubi]

Useful summaries, as always, Mr Shooshie! Was already clear to me, but I do think that after posting a question and getting a few answers, it would have been common courtesy for the OP to post whatever info he/she received from MOTU.

[Shooshie]

Useful summaries, as always, Mr Shooshie! Was already clear to me, but I do think that after posting a question and getting a few answers, it would have been common courtesy for the OP to post whatever info he/she received from MOTU.

Agreed. Of course, he/she may not be back. But it would have been nice to return the favor to us, considering that the OP was asking for our time and knowledge, but then did not contribute his. That's par for the situation, unfortunately.

Shooshie

[HCMarkus]

Agreed, hence my in my last post.

[Armageddon]

So far, I've been laying off all my audio internally by freezing VI tracks and further bouncing to disk if I need something mono, etc., then, bouncing my mixes out to two tracks. I've been doing it at 32-bit float. I'm not sure if there's an advantage to this or not, but I certainly haven't encountered any problems mixing and bouncing at 32-bit float, even on my comparatively slow machine and an interface that only does 24-bit. In fact, if I'm just doing audio mixing, DP 7 really runs like a top, unless I insist on using a lot of CPU-hungry plugs.

Once the mix is bounced down to a 88.2 kHz/32-bit float .wav stereo file (the only format it will save a 32-bit float file as), I load it up in Wave Editor and use its built-in iZotope sample-rate converter and M-BIT1 dithering to convert it down to 44.1 kHz/16-bit CD master file. I've definitely never encountered any problems doing this and the CD master files always sound great, aside from whatever mixing and mastering blunders I myself have perpetrated. If you're someone who subscribes to the "math theory" regarding resolution (like me), mixing and mastering at 88.2 kHz/32-bit float makes sense. Except ...

... I have yet to actually record audio at 88.2 kHz/32-bit float. I always assumed the "float" qualifier was internal to DP, or internal to .wav files, and, like many people here have pointed out, there really is no AD/DA converter out there capable of recording at 32-bit float. Worst case scenario, I'll end up having to record at 24-bit and up-convert those files, or DP will throw up an alert that the 24-bit files I've just recorded aren't compatible with the project and convert them on the spot. Since the VIs are being routed internally, though, and are technically "capturing" the audio at 32-bit float (not to mention, I can hear these files just fine on playback), I assume there's something else at work here. It'll definitely be interesting to see what happens when I go to record vocals in a 32-bit float project.

[Shooshie]

Agreed, hence my in my last post.

I agree that you in your last post. And I agree with your !

I'm just feeling downright agreeable today.
+1, dagnab it!

[HCMarkus]

Agreed, hence my in my last post.

I agree that you in your last post. And I agree with your !

I'm just feeling downright agreeable today.
+1, dagnab it!

I concur with your agreement and thank you for your words. Here's to an agreeable day for all of us, and you especially, Shooshie! I feel like I may have a 32-bit, dynamic and noise-free Monday myself.

[Armageddon]

And there is an external reference that remains the excellent source of information that it was then.
You'll find that HERE.

FYI, Shooshie, while I of course checked out your links, all it did was muddy my waters even more in regards to what 32-bit float actually means in comparison to 24-bit. If I read it correctly, I assume that, like I thought, 32-bit float is less of an actual thing and more of an internal process that allows for higher headroom/resolution, which explains why you can hear 32-bit float files on your 24-bit AD/DA converter, even if you play these files back through something as simple as your QT player. Let's put it this way, I certainly don't think you lose anything by recording, mixing and mastering at 32-bit float, and if you wind up mixing down to a two-track external recorder, like a 1-bit DSD unit or even to analog tape, you're possibly capturing more frequencies than you would if you'd just dumped it at 24-bits. And if you're bouncing to disc at that resolution, like I do, you've got a master file with all that resolution intact. As far as I can tell, most dithering algorithms don't have a problem downconverting from 32-bit float, either.