16 or 24 Bit?

I will answer you in a list...

Bits concern the achievable dynamic range, i.e., the horizontal divisions (if you are interested in this topic we can talk about it; it is very interesting to see how an analog wave is approximated to a digitized wave via wordclock and number of bits). Approximately 6 dB per bit are calculated, therefore with 16-bit we have a maximum dynamic range of 96dB, for 24-bit 144dB, although in reality up to a maximum of 122dB is utilized due to circuit problems. The difference? It depends on what you want to do...

If your intention is to produce a CD, then you can also work at 44100Hz at 16-bit since that is the maximum a CD can offer; otherwise, you must switch to DVD-Audio in PCM to have 24 bits available. 24-bit samples are useful when one wants to maintain a high-quality project intended for future remastering on media that will support 24-bit, or for Blu-ray cinematic productions.

The difference justifies the price exchange only if the samples were originally recorded at 24-bit and then at 16-bit, but not if only a single 24-bit sample was recorded which was then reconverted to 16-bit, precisely because starting from 24 and converting to 16, the sound is reconstructed and data is lost due to dithering, as you have already correctly stated.

Considering that the human ear (in perfect health) can only hear from 20 to 12000Hz, I wouldn't make big issues regarding the sampling frequency (at the very least with its 44100Hz which are then used in CDs).

You did very well, however, to cite your system specifications. With 4 GB of RAM, you can forget about 24-bit samples. If you are referring to EastWest, anyway, it seems to me that in the 24-bit versions they also provide the 16-bit ones; you should send an email. For 24-bit samples, I recommend at least 16GB of RAM to work easily with other instruments (with 8GB DDR3 I am really, really tight). In any case, I assure you that even 16-bit samples sound great! So, in your place, I would opt for those... Unless you have audio equipment worth thousands of euros, you simply won't hear the difference. If you want, I can send you two identical files, one with 16-bit samples and the other with 24-bit samples. Listen to them and let me know...

First of all, Simone, thank you very much, because your answer is exactly what I was hoping for in terms of expertise.

TheSimon wrote:

I will answer you in a list...

24-bit samples are needed when you want to maintain a high-quality project aimed at future remastering on media that will support 24-bit, or for film productions on Blu-ray.

I suspected as much, in my ignorance. My greatest ambition, for the moment, is to work in TV documentaries, short films, or theater (as I have already done). For now, Blu-ray production is definitely far off, but if I happen to make a fortune, I could always change equipment and make the necessary upgrades...

TheSimon wrote:

The difference justifies the price exchange only if the samples were recorded first at 24-bit and then at 16-bit, but not if only a single 24-bit sample was recorded and then converted to 16-bit, precisely because by starting from 24 and converting to 16, the sound is reconstructed and data is lost due to dithering, as you have already correctly stated.

Considering that the human ear (in perfect health) can only hear from 20 to 12,000 Hz, I wouldn't make a big deal out of the sampling frequency (at the very least with its 44,100 Hz which are then used in CDs).

I fear it is the second one you mentioned: the samples are identical, so they are certainly converted.

TheSimon wrote:

You did very well instead to mention your system specifications. With 4 GB of RAM, you can even forget about 24-bit samples.

In reality, I am already using Quantum Leap Pianos which is at 24-bit: the problems only emerge when I use the three microphone positions simultaneously, especially during playback; then, normally, I have to obtain single tracks to send to an editor (for now, I use GarageBand, which also exports at 24-bit). It is not a problem for the piano, but it certainly would be for the various orchestral sections (assuming also that the strings, for example, would have higher volumes than a piano; if nothing else, due to the variety of articulations).

TheSimon wrote:

If you are referring to EastWest, anyway, it seems to me that in the 24-bit versions they also provide the 16-bit ones, you should send an email.

That is the case for the Symphonic Orchestra Platinum Plus; which however costs twice as much, precisely...

TheSimon wrote:

For 24-bit samples, I recommend at least 16 GB of RAM to work easily (with 8 DDR3 I am really, really tight with a piano).

Sorry, what is an 8 DDR3?

TheSimon wrote:

Anyway, I assure you that even 16-bit samples sound great! So in your place, I would opt for those... Unless you have audio equipment worth thousands of euros, you really won't hear the difference. If you want, I can send you two identical files, one with 16-bit samples and the other with 24-bit samples. Listen to them and tell me...

Thank you, I would be curious, but I take your word for it! So it is not true what some say, i.e., that it would still be desirable to sample at a higher number of bits, even if this dynamic is then compressed into 16... In fact, it didn't seem logical to me.

Thanks again Simone, you have been a great help. In reality, I should buy an East West bundle (7 libraries, all compatible with "my" Sibelius), taking advantage of an ongoing offer; but, if I had no way to run the orchestra smoothly (which, with the piano, should constitute a bit of the "heart" of the arrangements I want to make), it would be hard to manage the other libraries too (which I think I will have to treat and export separately, anyway...). With 16-bit, I should be fine instead.

CromaDiBrera wrote:

In reality, I am already using Quantum Leap Pianos which is at 24-bit: the problems only emerge when I use the three microphone setups simultaneously, especially during playback; then, normally, I have to obtain single tracks to send to an editor (for now, I use Garageband, which also exports at 24-bit). It's not a problem for the piano, but it certainly would be for the various orchestral sections (assuming also that the strings, for example, would have higher volumes than a piano; if nothing else, due to the variety of articulations).

And if 3 microphone setups suck up more than 4 GB on the Steinway, let's not even talk about the Bösendorfer where they captured 18 velocity levels for each articulation.

Sorry, what is an 8 DDR3?

8GB DDR3 RAM (1333 MHz, which is the clock frequency it works at; the higher the clock frequency, the faster data is moved into the memory banks and retrieved)

Thank you, I would also be curious, but I take your word for it! So it's not true what some say, i.e., that it would still be desirable to sample at a higher number of bits, even if this dynamic is then compressed into 16... In fact, it didn't seem logical to me.

Well no, theoretically there is a small difference, but practically I dare you to find a person in this world capable of distinguishing, while listening, which is a 24->16 converted sample versus one natively sampled at 16-bit. I would have to show you graphically what happens when a sampling is converted by varying the number of bits or by varying the sample rate, or both.

Thanks again Simone, you have been a great help. In reality, I should buy an EastWest bundle (7 libraries, all compatible with "my" Sibelius), taking advantage of an ongoing offer; but, if I didn't have a way to run the orchestra smoothly (which, with the piano, should constitute a bit of the "heart" of the arrangements I would like to make), it would be hard to manage the other libraries as well (which I think I will have to treat and export separately, anyway...). With 16-bit, however, I should be fine.

Depending on how many instruments you need to load... I don't know if even with 16-bit you are safe. 4 GB of RAM is truly very little for someone using a computer for work purposes with graphics or music. I would opt to upgrade to at least 8 GB. Memory sticks don't cost much (it always depends on which memory you install). On my laptop I have 8GB, on my desktop 16GB; for the moment I don't have problems there... On the laptop, it depends on the amount of samples loaded.

TheSimon wrote:

...

8GB DDR3 RAM (1333 MHz, which is the clock frequency at which it operates; the higher the clock frequency, the faster data is moved into and retrieved from the memory banks)

...

Depending on how many instruments you need to load... I don't know if even with 16-bit you'll be safe. 4 GB of RAM is truly very little for someone using a computer for professional purposes involving graphics or music. I would opt to upgrade to at least 8 GB. Memory sticks aren't that expensive (it always depends on which memory you install). On my laptop I have 8GB, on my desktop 16GB; for the moment, I don't have any problems there... On the laptop, it depends on the amount of samples loaded.

I studied the matter a bit (including the minimum and recommended requirements for the libraries) and I realize you are right: as they are, I could only play back the 16-bit version of Gold + one piano in the "lite" version and, perhaps, a couple of other instruments from other libraries, only choosing the full samples at the moment of exporting each one from Sibelius to the editor (this is my "way": I use the sequencer only for mixing) ... Definitely inconvenient.

I am just wondering, having 4 GB in dual core (2x2 DDR3 at 1066) and 3.06 GHz for now, if I must add the same type of memory in the two remaining slots or if I can also put in two 4 GB sticks (for a total of 12), and at 1333 instead of 1066.

Eheh, it's not like you can put RAM in however you want; if you have RAM installed at 1066 MHz (which is always DDR3), it means the processor supports a 1066 bus. By putting 1333 MHz RAM, you are just spending extra money because the clock is still limited to 1066. In any case, you could opt for 16GB if you have a motherboard with 4 slots.

Look at this listing, it's one of many... http://www.ebay.it/itm/Geil-16Gb-Dimm-DDR3-1066-Quad-Kit-RAM-DDR3-1066-MHz-GVP316GB1066C7QC-/290687873901?pt=Memorie_per_PC_e_Server&hash=item43ae58f36d#ht_5480wt_993

With 16GB, you can start working reasonably well.

TheSimon wrote:

Eheh, it's not like you can install RAM as you please; if you have RAM installed at 1066 MHz (which is always DDR3), it means the processor supports a 1066 bus. By installing 1333 MHz RAM, you are just spending extra money because the clock is still limited to 1066. In any case, you could opt for 16GB if you have a motherboard with 4 slots.

Yes, I should have 4 slots because the memory slot indicates 4 slots, two of which are empty. And instead (sorry to take advantage of this), setting aside the clock speed, can I keep the two I have and add two more 4GB ones, reaching 12? Considering that I would only use some libraries simultaneously, it might be sufficient for me... maybe I'll try that before replacing the two I already have.

Thanks again.

Sorry, I see now that your link refers to an entire 16 kit; I thought I had to purchase RAM separately to put in the slots... . In short, I should study these things better. Again.

But you should get 16GB, trust me; to avoid spending 40 euros more, you risk being right on the edge with memory usage. With 16, you'll be quite safe.