32 bit, 24 bit, 16 bit, Who is lying?

[vvv]

According to the workspace in PT, the files I received are 16bit 44k.

....

When viewing the files in AA, it tells me they are "0.24 type 3", or "32 bit mono".

There is a adjustable parameter in some DAW's, like Cool Edit and presumably Audition, what lets you make conversion to 32 bit on file-opening a default.

It seems to me that if PT is reading it as a 16 bit file, it is a 16 bit fiile.

Again, my bet is that AA is opening that 16 bit file as a 32 bit, per settings in AA (in CEP it's accessible from the drop-down at "Options/Settings/Auto-convert to 32 bit upon opening".)

On the other hand, not working in PT, I'm assuming that "workspace " means you are opening the file in PT? Altho', doya think it would "read" different than it "opens"?

FWIW, do let me remind that one reason for converting 16 bit into 24 (or 32 bit float) is to give any processing done to the file "more room to work". I guess, then, my question is, does it matter (other than for curiosity and mebbe comparison) if they were originally recorded at 16 bit? 24 is where ya wanna be, if ya can, if you are at all editing or processing those tracks.

[leigh]

FWIW, do let me remind that one reason for converting 16 bit into 24 (or 32 bit float) is to give any processing done to the file "more room to work". I guess, then, my question is, does it matter (other than for curiosity and mebbe comparison) if they were originally recorded at 16 bit? 24 is where ya wanna be, if ya can, if you are at all editing or processing those tracks.

Yes, if you have a 16 bit source file that you are doing processing on, it benefits you to store the results of that processing as 24 bit. You've changed the audio, introducing information that lives "below" those 16 original bits, so you might as well capture that new signal accurately. Even a tiny fader move will "activate" those extra bits of information.

It does still matter though, if your original files were recorded at 16 bit instead of 24. In a 16 bit capture, you simply don't have those lowest 8 bits of information of what the sound "in the room" originally was, and you can never get them back.

In practice, if you are doing a lot of heavy processing (like typical rock/pop mixing techniques) to tracks, even the golden-eared would be hard-pressed to distinguish whether the original files were captured at 16 or 24 bit. But, for cleaner stuff that's not getting mashed through compressors or having gobs of reverb piled onto it (typical classical/jazz mixes), those extra 8 bits of accuracy in the original capture are more likely to matter.

cheers,
Leigh

[vvv]

That's why I said,

"24 is where ya wanna be, if ya can, if you are at all editing or processing those tracks."

[leigh]

That's why I said,

"24 is where ya wanna be, if ya can, if you are at all editing or processing those tracks."

Yes, although you also said:

my question is, does it matter (other than for curiosity and mebbe comparison) if they were originally recorded at 16 bit? 24 is where ya wanna be, if ya can, if you are at all editing or processing those tracks.

And I'm saying it *does* matter if the originals were recorded at 16 bit. Some heavy processing will, in practice, obliterate the importance of those 8 lowest bits that weren't captured (by recording in 16 bit instead of 24). However, with plain old editing, or lighter processing, you could tell a difference if the originals were only captured at 16.

You could also argue that, with compression or limiting, that those 8 lowest bits become more important, seeing as how the quieter details of the audio (i.e. the lowest bits) become magnified by dynamics processing.

So, after largely agreeing with you, that's the part I was elaborating on.

Cool?

[vvv]

Well, I'm not tryna be uncool, either.

My point was that he's got the tracks, they are already recorded, they are presented as 24 bit, and if they were originally started as 16 bit, there is nothing he can do in that regard - but as they exist as 24 bit, what is where they should be for editing, etc.

And yes, was they recorded at 24 bit, it would been better (assuming they were not), but since they are now 24 bit, by whatever route - that's what he's got.

IOW, curiosity is cool, but ya can't change 'em any more better than to make 'em 24 bit, what is what they (now, anyway) are.

Jes' a matter of emphasis, I s'pose, or "elaboration".

[leigh]

Agree with all that - I think we're on the same team!

[vvv]

Kin I getta "Hell, yeah!"?