When did studios begin 24bit recording ?

[Ropeburn]

Hey! I like to listen to noise and pops and rumble with the best possible sound quality.

That reminds me, I've yet to try the granular engine of my new toy.

 

[Multicore]

I largely agree with you @Ropeburn but only conditionally on this part:

It's all a matter of finding those gems, and that's become easier than ever before. Labels still exist as curators and pre-selectors, efficiently accompanied by bloggers, YouTube channels, internet radio, and whatnot, all of which add to the ease of finding the good stuff.

I don't think it's easier now that I have an ocean of choices all placed on an undifferentiated surface. It's like shopping on Amazon. I become discouraged very quickly by the slog of the lazy UIs and give up. It seems like a struggle and not how I want to spend my time and puts me off music. Shopping for LPs and CDs, especially with friends or with shop staff that know things and are helpful, was nice and I enjoyed it.

 

[Svperstar]

Hey! I like to listen to noise and pops and rumble with the best possible sound quality.

Years ago there was actually a video on YouTube and website that added wow and flutter and clicks and pops to any song making it sound convincingly analog. I was shocked how well it worked. Made any song sound like a worn out record or tape from the 1970s

 

[Ropeburn]

Years ago there was actually a video on YouTube and website that added wow and flutter and clicks and pops to any song making it sound convincingly analog. I was shocked how well it worked. Made any song sound like a worn out record or tape from the 1970s

Those are staple effects in music production and abundant on all possible platforms. Vinyl and tape simulation, wow, flutter, hiss, rumble, crackle, anything you want. Fully adjustable. Just a small part of the whole "lofi effects" category really.

 

[SoundsGood64]

I'm curious about digital studio technique and when did "high-def" begin - maybe call it second generation post 16 bit ?
Another way of asking the Q is how many of my(common pop & jazz) recordings have been up-sampled ? What year did 24 bit recordings get made ?
TIA

"In 1994, DG’s recording of Mahler’s “Symphony of a Thousand”, with Claudio Abbado conducting the Berlin Philharmonic by Abbado, saw the first use of 24-bit multi-track recording" from this website:

The Evolution of Recorded Sound - Google Arts & Culture

From shellac dics to CD. A technological leap in the human history, to which DG has made major contributions

artsandculture.google.com

The booklet notes it was recorded in February 1994 at Berlin Philharmonie but does not note details of the recording such as whether it was 24-bit multi-track. There's just the "4D Audio Recording" marking in the top right, which earlier recordings from Deutsche Grammophon also had. This is DG 445 843-2. Wondering if anyone has found an earlier specimen. The website could be referring to DG only or referring to all recordings, which is uncertain.

 

[DVDdoug]

Perhaps interestingly, mixing increases bit depth resolution! If you multi-track record at 16-bits you won't usually don't have enough tracks to get 24-bits but you need more than 16-bits to hold all of the information.

Mixing is done by summation... Actually it's more of a weighted average since the levels are adjusted before and after mixing. (Analog mixers are built-around summing amplifiers, again with adjustments for each input plus an adjustment for the master output.)

If you do a straight sum you may need more bits to hold the bigger numbers. If you average you can also get more resolution. For example, in base-10 decimal, the average of 4 and 5 is 4.5 so you need resolution to the right of the decimal point to keep accuracy.

 

[Svperstar]

Those are staple effects in music production and abundant on all possible platforms. Vinyl and tape simulation, wow, flutter, hiss, rumble, crackle, anything you want. Fully adjustable. Just a small part of the whole "lofi effects" category really.

I imagine you could do a much better job of it if you are an audio engineer, but this was an automatic thing. You uploaded any MP3/YouTube link and it came out the other end sounding analog. It was pretty neat.

 

[EJ3]

I imagine you could do a much better job of it if you are an audio engineer, but this was an automatic thing. You uploaded any MP3/YouTube link and it came out the other end sounding analog. It was pretty neat.

I remember hearing that and always wondered (and still do): why would someone want to do that?

 

[DVDdoug]

You uploaded any MP3/YouTube link and it came out the other end sounding analog.

Lossy compression can degrade the sound but it's not the same as analog degradation. Video is "similar". Low-bitrate or low-resolution digital video doesn't look like VHS and when VHS degrades you don't get "pixelization".

Years ago, somebody told me that if you uploaded a digitized record to your Apple Music account, they would replace it with a link-reference of their standard digital version and then you'd have a clean-digital copy. (That way they didn't have to store) multiple separate copies of songs.) It was lossy M4A, but of course much better than scratchy analog vinyl. I don't know if it works that way anymore... I assume everybody now has their own separate cloud storage with no trickery.

I remember hearing that and always wondered (and still do): why would someone want to do that?

Izotope has a "vinyl" plug-in, It's the only free plug-in that they offer (as far as I know) so I assumed it was a JOKE on people who think analog is better, and I sort-of wondered if it was introduced on April Fools Day.

But Google says it was Izotope's first plug-in so apparently it was NOT intended a joke.

 

[EJ3]

Lossy compression can degrade the sound but it's not the same as analog degradation. Video is "similar". Low-bitrate or low-resolution digital video doesn't look like VHS and when VHS degrades you don't get "pixelization".

Years ago, somebody told me that if you uploaded a digitized record to your Apple Music account, they would replace it with a link-reference of their standard digital version and then you'd have a clean-digital copy. (That way they didn't have to store) multiple separate copies of songs.) It was lossy M4A, but of course much better than scratchy analog vinyl. I don't know if it works that way anymore... I assume everybody now has their own separate cloud storage with no trickery.


Izotope has a "vinyl" plug-in, It's the only free plug-in that they offer (as far as I know) so I assumed it was a JOKE on people who think analog is better, and I sort-of wondered if it was introduced on April Fools Day.

But Google says it was Izotope's first plug-in so apparently it was NOT intended a joke.

I guess some folks have their reasons for wanting that. But I don't have or foresee a reason for me wanting to do that.

 

[Svperstar]

I remember hearing that and always wondered (and still do): why would someone want to do that?

It made any song sound nostalgic

 

[Ropeburn]

I imagine you could do a much better job of it if you are an audio engineer, but this was an automatic thing. You uploaded any MP3/YouTube link and it came out the other end sounding analog. It was pretty neat.

Fun with tape recording:

Prince Rope - The Night My Viral Left Me.mp3 | Powered by Box

app.box.com

A simple housey piece of mine. A good example because that kind of House is just what you'd associate with "oldschool" and "vintage" sound. Now through tape, a typical old deck that needs servicing, cranked recording volume:

Night - tape.mp3 | Powered by Box

app.box.com

...of course that's not real tape but a cassette simulator on a Roland sampler. Close enough for "artistic" purposes.

 

[mocenigo]

"In 1994, DG’s recording of Mahler’s “Symphony of a Thousand”, with Claudio Abbado conducting the Berlin Philharmonic by Abbado, saw the first use of 24-bit multi-track recording" from this website:

The Evolution of Recorded Sound - Google Arts & Culture

From shellac dics to CD. A technological leap in the human history, to which DG has made major contributions

artsandculture.google.com

The booklet notes it was recorded in February 1994 at Berlin Philharmonie but does not note details of the recording such as whether it was 24-bit multi-track. There's just the "4D Audio Recording" marking in the top right, which earlier recordings from Deutsche Grammophon also had. This is DG 445 843-2. Wondering if anyone has found an earlier specimen. The website could be referring to DG only or referring to all recordings, which is uncertain.
View attachment 516987

I thought the "4D" recoirdings used TWO 18 bit DACs, with two analog preamps in front of them, one of which had a 18dB gain, giving an effective resolution of 21 bits for places where the higher gained DAC did not clip.

 

[SuicideSquid]

I guess some folks have their reasons for wanting that. But I don't have or foresee a reason for me wanting to do that.

Same reason people listen to vinyl records and run tube amps. They like the sound of the noise and distortion added by these things.

As long as you understand that you're adding noise and distortion and that vinyl and tubes aren't somehow magically revealing details that are hidden by digitization, no harm. It's fun to play with these things.

And as someone who records music, sometimes you want to add that kind of noise and harmonic distortion to a track to give it the right "vibe". I never go too heavy on that stuff but throwing a bit of tape saturation on vocals or drums can really change the feel, and sometimes you want to make that artistic choice. Bugs me when audiophiles don't consider that the artist and recording engineer have already considered this and added the appropriate amount of saturation and harmonic distortion, though, so you don't need to go piling on more.

 

[SoundsGood64]

I thought the "4D" recoirdings used TWO 18 bit DACs, with two analog preamps in front of them, one of which had a 18dB gain, giving an effective resolution of 21 bits for places where the higher gained DAC did not clip.

That is what the CD booklets state for some 1995 releases such as Debussy: La Mer, Nocturnes (Boulez, The Cleveland Orchestra, recorded 1991, 1993).

The 3 below have "The 23-bit digital-floating technique combines two A/D (analog-digital) converters with a resolution of 20-bit each."
Rossini: Stabat Mater (Chung, rec 6/1995) 449 178-2
Chopin: The Nocturnes (Maria Joao Pires, rec 1/1995, 4/1996) 447 096-2
Berlioz: La Damnation de Faust (Chung, rec 4&5/1995, 6/1996) 453 500-2

All 4 above have the "4D Audio Recording" on the cover.

 

[mocenigo]

That is what the CD booklets state for some 1995 releases such as Debussy: La Mer, Nocturnes (Boulez, The Cleveland Orchestra, recorded 1991, 1993).

The 3 below have "The 23-bit digital-floating technique combines two A/D (analog-digital) converters with a resolution of 20-bit each."
Rossini: Stabat Mater (Chung, rec 6/1995) 449 178-2
Chopin: The Nocturnes (Maria Joao Pires, rec 1/1995, 4/1996) 447 096-2
Berlioz: La Damnation de Faust (Chung, rec 4&5/1995, 6/1996) 453 500-2

All 4 above have the "4D Audio Recording" on the cover.

Thank you. I may have remembered 18-bit when in fact it was 20-bit, or there was more than one version of the technology.

 

[Ziofrenko]

This whole "resolution"-related-bitdepth thing makes no sense! I was hoping, in 2026, that this concept would be clear... At least here!
A higher or lower bitdepth simply means more or less background noise! The "resolution" remains the same!!! Resolution depends on the sample rate, however...

 

[DVDdoug]

A higher or lower bitrate [bit depth] simply means more or less background noise!

True! This is how low resolution audio is perceived/heard. At low resolution you can hear quantization noise. A lot of people talk about hearing "resolution" but they are talking about something else.

A lot of people think that analog has "infinite resolution" but, in-fact, analog resolution (or "precision") is limited by noise, but it doesn't directly correlate with digital resolution, just as low-resolution analog video doesn't look like low-resolution digital video.

Don't confuse bitrate (kbps = kilobits per second) with bit depth (16 or 24-bits, etc.). They are related with uncompressed audio. We can calculate the bitrate of CD audio as 16 bits X 44.1Khz X 2-channels = 1411 kbps. With compressed audio, the bitrate is an indication of the amount of compression and with lossy compression (MP3, etc.) it can be an indication of quality. It can also be used to calculate file size.

A higher or lower bitrate simply means more or less background noise! The "resolution" remains the same!!!

Wrong! He actually shows more resolution in the beginning with the "smoother" waveform. This is the technical definition of resolution but not exactly how we perceive it.

Plus, the DAC normally has a smoothing filter so the actual analog output is "smooth". But the analog output still has less resolution/precision at low bit-depths.

Resolution depends on the sample rate

The bit depth represents amplitude resolution. Sample rate determines time resolution and it limits the high frequency content. Audio is quantized in 2-dimensions.

 

[Ziofrenko]

Thanks for the clarification! Look at the video, the audio quality, its resolution, is identical between a 24 and an 8 file... Only the background noise changes.

 

[Palladium]

I was telling some younger PC gamers how insane PCs were in the 1990s. An absolutely top of the line PC from 1995 would be useless for gaming by 1999. I know people still using PCs from 2018 in 2026.

Part of that reason is modern big budget games are made good for watching but meh when actually played. Especially those so-called "cinematic" games that has little to offer outside of plot.

Control complexity is also a huge problem: Old games like HoMM3 and C&C can be played with just a lone mouse, while new stuff like Zelda: BOTW that needs a gazillion buttons to operate means I will forget the controls if I stopped playing for a day or so.