|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Macintosh
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 46
Enthusiast
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 46 |
Hey Guys,
Need a little help in understanding BIAB realtracks quality vs recording quality. It's my understanding that a track recorded at 44.khz/16bit is basically cd quality, but a track recorded at 96k 24 bit is professional quality. I know that depending what recording equipment you use depends on the overall quality of your recorded product. The perfect world(as I understand it) is to record everything in 96k 24 bit and then after compression, effects,etc you end up with a perfect "professional" level product. How do the realtracks measure up to those standards? If I recorded vocals and lets say a guitar track at 96k/24 bit, and then added some realtracks to finish out the song, would the final mix have the capability of a "professional" product? Still trying to put all the pieces together. Thanks Again,
Roger
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Macintosh
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 812
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 812 |
Well, regardless what bitrate you use, it still has to be "Downsampled" or "Converted" back to 16 bit/44khz. Why? Because this is the standard for playing CD's. Now, you could keep your 24bit/96khz for playing from a DVD, but how many record companies are selling Audio CDs on DVD? Concert DVDs are another story of course.
I too use a Higher bit and sample rate, BUT...for many users this is over rated. The reason is that unless you have top rate converters, Mic Pre amps, Mics, etc, you aren't going to hear much of a difference.
As far as the difference in BIAB, maybe Matt Finley can chime in here, as I know he has the "Audiophile" version of Real Tracks/Drums. However, I do believe that the Bit/Sample rate used for recording the Tracks is the same. It is how they are stored, or compressed, that is different. If I'm wrong, I hope someone will correct me.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Macintosh
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 46
Enthusiast
|
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 46 |
HI ed,
Thanks for the reply. I was under the impression(maybe incorrectly.lol) that if you had 2 projects--1 recorded in 44.1khz/16bit and 1 in 96khz/24 bit and you did the final mix and master track, that the 96k would sound a lot better--even on a cd. Someone told me that was because once the projects(tracks) go thru all the compression,effects,etc the 44.1khz ends up being sub par when compared to the 96khz. Again, this may be totally off base--I'm just trying to figure it out. Or in other words--is it possible to get an excellent recording when using 44.1khz/16 bit equipment along with obviously a professional mike? I recently entered a song into a competition. The critique came back that most everything(lyrics,tempo,instruments,etc) were good but the recording was bad. I used biab along with garageband, and an 8 track digital 44.1khz/16 bit recorder. I also used Rokit monitors to listen with. So I'm trying to figure out if it was my inexperience or the quality of the equipment I was using. I know a lot comes into play-like the environment, equipment, vocal quality. etc. That's how I got into thinking about the audiophile realtracks vs the regualr realtracks as far as quality. Thanks Again,
Roger
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Macintosh
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,992
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,992 |
Airchair
re high sampling rates and convertors in general ,
you might want to read some of the esteemed dan lavrys
papers on the subject. (he makes hi end convertor boxes.)
also..some time record a trak at high sampling rates and then get
a programmers inspection utility and inspect the recorded
trak , what youll see..is..lots of padding.
translation..wasted disc space.
there have boon oodles of flame fests n debates n gear shootouts
on various recording forums on this topic.
so i have no desire to start another.
there have even been blind tests of traks recorded useing uber hi end convertors
versus lowly sound devices. at various sampling rates.
some people claim sternly they can hear a diff at high sampling rates.
and i'm sure the debate will rage on for years to come.
moi..my degrees in physics..and given my own research i'm keeping with lower
rates due to the wasted disc space/padding aspect.
retired puter engr....powertracks on amd......NICE !
"what is the black art of audio engineering ?"
my silly songs...motagator.com/bmanning
see my tips in the tips section.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Macintosh
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 116
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 116 |
Svar till:
...The critique came back that most everything(lyrics,tempo,instruments,etc) were good but the recording was bad. I used biab along with garageband, and an 8 track digital 44.1khz/16 bit recorder. ..
...and what samplerate did you set Garageband to? Isn't the highest samplerate for Garageband 24/44? In my experince the difference is more obvious when you use badly written plugins and the roundoff errors get less noticeble in a higher samplerate. I would say that your problem is not samplerates in BIAB, but you should get a program for mixing that is easier to control than Garageband - like Logic or Pro Tools... and a set of Mastering plugins from Waves or TC or hire a pro-guy to do it fore you and sit beside him and watch what he does?
Product owner: BIAB Win 2009 MegaP|Mac 2011
PoCoX8|MD3|H4|VSS3|DVR2|
PT 9.0|Reason 5|K4|Goliath|Ivory|Trilian|VG2|
MacBook 17"|2.8 mhz|4 GB|OSX 10.6.7|One|Bandst.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Macintosh
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 335
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 335 |
That is hogwash. I just finished a CD that was recorded at 44.1 at 24 bits. 24 tracks. Sounded great, and it is out on Jazz radio stations right now (its a big band CD). Recording 24bits DOES make a difference, but 96Khz doesn't guarantee anything other than you are going to have huge files to work with. Things like the microphones used, the preamps, etc, etc matter a lot more than simply sticking the recorder at 96khz/24bits. And I'm not a HUGE fan of compression either.....but that is another subject Quote:
Hey Guys,
Need a little help in understanding BIAB realtracks quality vs recording quality. It's my understanding that a track recorded at 44.khz/16bit is basically cd quality, but a track recorded at 96k 24 bit is professional quality. I know that depending what recording equipment you use depends on the overall quality of your recorded product. The perfect world(as I understand it) is to record everything in 96k 24 bit and then after compression, effects,etc you end up with a perfect "professional" level product. How do the realtracks measure up to those standards? If I recorded vocals and lets say a guitar track at 96k/24 bit, and then added some realtracks to finish out the song, would the final mix have the capability of a "professional" product? Still trying to put all the pieces together. Thanks Again,
Roger
Musician, Polymath, Google Jedi, Apple Master, Windows Wrangler and Digital Wizard. High ratings in Nerd-fu & Geek-fu.
M1 Mac Mini, MacBook Pro Touchbar 15", Intel 27" iMac, M1 Mac Mini
https://musician.social/@ericdano
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Macintosh
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 335
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 335 |
First off, when you record you really want 24 bit and at least 44.1Khz. Garageband can do this (they call it Audio Resolution in the Preferences). I don't think it does anything higher than 44.1. Again, you can get great recordings at 44.1Khz and 24bit. A pro mic is NOT going to help anything connected to a crappy preamp and recorder. It really depends on what exactly you are hooking up to what. A Nuemann 87 hooked to a crappy recorder probably isn't going to sound any better than a Shure 57. I would think that the weak link in your setup is the un-named 8 track 44.1khz/16bit machine. I've done a number of projects with previous versions of Band in a Box recording at 44.1Khz and 24 bit that sound great. And the band in a box files where generated via DXi from a Windows Machine saved to WAVE format if I remember correctly. And I don't think we used any high end plugins other than some reverb using Altiverb (I LOVE Altiverb!) But I hardly think getting the Audiophile version of Band in a Box is going to make things better.....nor going out and buying ProTools either. I'd suggest maybe ditching the 8 track and getting some sort of good USB or Firewire device to hook up to Garageband (if you want to keep using that) or some other program. MOTU hardware comes with their Midi-less version of Digital Performer I believe (audiodesk?) which would probably be totally fine to use (I am a regular Digital Performer user). M-Audio has some good hardware that can be bought for around $100....... Quote:
HI ed,
Thanks for the reply. I was under the impression(maybe incorrectly.lol) that if you had 2 projects--1 recorded in 44.1khz/16bit and 1 in 96khz/24 bit and you did the final mix and master track, that the 96k would sound a lot better--even on a cd. Someone told me that was because once the projects(tracks) go thru all the compression,effects,etc the 44.1khz ends up being sub par when compared to the 96khz. Again, this may be totally off base--I'm just trying to figure it out. Or in other words--is it possible to get an excellent recording when using 44.1khz/16 bit equipment along with obviously a professional mike? I recently entered a song into a competition. The critique came back that most everything(lyrics,tempo,instruments,etc) were good but the recording was bad. I used biab along with garageband, and an 8 track digital 44.1khz/16 bit recorder. I also used Rokit monitors to listen with. So I'm trying to figure out if it was my inexperience or the quality of the equipment I was using. I know a lot comes into play-like the environment, equipment, vocal quality. etc. That's how I got into thinking about the audiophile realtracks vs the regualr realtracks as far as quality. Thanks Again,
Roger
Musician, Polymath, Google Jedi, Apple Master, Windows Wrangler and Digital Wizard. High ratings in Nerd-fu & Geek-fu.
M1 Mac Mini, MacBook Pro Touchbar 15", Intel 27" iMac, M1 Mac Mini
https://musician.social/@ericdano
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Macintosh
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1
Newbie
|
|
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1 |
Just to chime in, it's perfectly possible to make excellent sounding, 'professional' recordings at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz and a bit depth of 24 bits, providing your gar is high quality and your knowledge and experience is up to scratch.
Judging from Airchair's OP, I get the impression that you're just starting out at this level of music production and recording. I'd assume that part of the "bad recording" comments you got is due to the 8 track/44.1/16 bit recorder you're using, as ericdano pointed out. It's a good guess that the built-in preamps and converters are poor consumer quality, if that.
No one, who is serious about audio quality today, will settle for 16 bit gear anyway. 24 bit is the way to go; that way you can set your levels to peak at, say, -12dB to get the best audio quality out of your converters and still compress your vocals after the fact with loads of dynamic range to spare. As for 96kHz, as others have said – just forget about it; it's not relevant in your situation.
Also, and no slur intended, music recording is an acquired skill. It would seem from your posts that you're not yet very experienced in the field, so I'd hazard a guess that part of the "bad recording" has to be attributed to driver error.
We've all been there, and the only thing is to just keep at it and also to read up on recording theory and technology. For instance, level staging of the signal chain can be very important for getting the best out of preamps and converters.
Another point – your Rokit monitors may still sound like s--t, if your listening room is badly tuned.
There are quite a few free websites dealing with how-to for recordists. I don't have any up my sleeve right now, but Google's your friend (unless you happen to live in mainland China).
Good luck and best regards,
Joachim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box 2025 Italian Version is Here!
Cari amici
È stata aggerate la versione in Italiano del programma più amato dagli appassionati di musica, il nostro Band-in-a-Box.
Questo è il link alla nuova versione 2025.
Di seguito i link per scaricare il pacchetti di lingua italiana aggiornati per Band-in-a-Box e RealBand, anche per chi avesse già comprato la nuova versione in inglese.
Band-in-a-Box 2025 - Italiano
RealBand 2025 - Italiano
Band-in-a-Box 2025 French Version is Here!
Bonjour à tous,
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 pour Windows est disponible en Français.
Le téléchargement se fait à partir du site PG Music
Pour ceux qui auraient déjà acheté la version 2025 de Band-in-a-Box (et qui donc ont une version anglaise), il est possible de "franciser" cette version avec les patchs suivants:
BIAB 2025 - francisation
RealBand 2025 - francisation
Voilà, enjoy!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 German Version is Here!
Update Your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 to Build 1128 for Windows Today!
Already using Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 1128 now from our Support Page to enjoy the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
Stay up to date—get the latest update now!
Update to RealBand® 2025 Build 5 Windows Today!
Already using RealBand® 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 5 now from our Support Page to ensure you have the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
Get the latest update today!
PowerTracks Pro Audio 2025 for Windows is Here!
PowerTracks Pro Audio 2025 is here! This new version introduces many features, including VST3 support, the ability to load or import a .FLAC file, a reset option for track height in the Tracks window, a taller Timeline on the Notation window toolbar, new freeze buttons in the Tracks window, three toolbar modes (two rows, single row, and none), the improved Select Patch dialog with text-based search and numeric patch display, a new button in the DirectX/VST window to copy an effects group, and more!
First-time packages start at only $49. Already a PowerTracks Pro Audio user? Upgrade for as little as $29!
www.pgmusic.com/powertracks.htm
Video: Summary of the New Band-in-a-Box® App for iOS®
Join Tobin as he takes you on a tour of the new Band-in-a-Box® app for iOS®! Designed for musicians, singer-songwriters, and educators, this powerful tool lets you create, play, and transfer songs effortlessly on your iPhone® or iPad®—anytime, anywhere.
Band-in-a-Box® for iOS® :Summary video.
Check out the forum post for more information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics84,084
Posts775,189
Members39,585
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean