16bit vs 24bit [POLL] MPC5000

Cheebatone wrote:You forgot Option Three: Who cares, as long as it sounds OK?

well, yeah that's it really, you said it, it just doesn't ... so that's why there were only the two choices.

don't get me wrong 16bit is good - as i use an MPC1000 and get some great sounding stuff from it, and intend to keep using it for years.

AWW_NAWW wrote:

7 1 4 Beats wrote:

formantuk wrote:my opinion: is that it was a mistake - i was expecting a machine of higher quality audio that could also play 16bit for backwards compatibility.
most computer programs are now 24bit - and would think in a couple of years will go over to 32bit.
so what's going on the MPC4000 was 24bit - why are AKAI releasing a flagship MPC with a lower bit rate?

MPC4000 is not 24 bit it is backwards compatible!

umm are you stupid???

all 4ks are 24bit 96k the 4k plus means it comes with the spdif/wordclock optrion nothing more

all 4k sample at 24bit 96k and play back 24bit 96k

Wow I didn't realize that your stupid for giving correct information. It still takes & reads samples that 16/44.1 & 24/96 so you tell me how I am stupid smartguy?

7 1 4 Beats wrote:MPC4000 is not 24 bit it is backwards compatible!

7 1 4 Beats wrote:Wow I didn't realize that your stupid for giving correct information. It still takes & reads samples that 16/44.1 & 24/96 so you tell me how I am stupid smartguy?

hey beats take it easy - you can't complain, you didn't give correct information. U said the MPC4000 was
NOT 24bit. there it is, above your own words.
so you musta made a typo or is there something we missed?

I didn't explain what I was trying to say right. I meant it still takes 16/44 & 24/96 so even tho the output is 24/96 you can still get a good 12 bit or 16 bit sound by resampling and having a 24/96.

thanks for clearing that up beats - sometimes things get twisted over pointless stuff.
what you now say makes a lot more sense.

hey, i have a 16/44khz mpc, works like a charm and its called a 2kxl, other than that about 24chnls of recording through an inline console, converters the lot so who needs a 24bit/44khz recorder....

man , i love my 2kxl

Hi all,

Maybe I'm missing something, but since the end product of the recording process will either be a 16bit/44.1KHz CD, or an mp3 which is far lower in quality, I really can't see why people are fussed about 24 bit sampling - especially if you're sampling off vinyl!!

I'm probably a real old fart by most of your standards - (I can remember when stereo LPs were the big breakthrough in sound quality!) - and I've welcomed each improvement in recording quality over the years, but I have to say I think the CD standard of 16-bit/44.1 is fine - I think very few people can really hear any difference above that. In fact, with the rise of the MP3, more and more people are listening to music at sub-CD spec, which I think is a sad step backwards.

Earbrass wrote:Hi all,

Maybe I'm missing something, but since the end product of the recording process will either be a 16bit/44.1KHz CD, or an mp3 which is far lower in quality, I really can't see why people are fussed about 24 bit sampling - especially if you're sampling off vinyl!!

Because people tend to miss that it has nothing to do with the end product.
It based on the more efficient and consistent processing that you can do along the way to the end result.
The lower your digital resolution the your headroom and at some pointin time it has to give up some aspect your your project.
Unfortunately in the digital world it's not beneficial as in analog so it's a loss in quality.
Thanks to current dither schemes we can be pretty efficient with going from hi to low so you retain much more of what you pick up along the way.
So if you could take the same project and do 16/44 and compare it to even a version of the same project that was actually done at 24/44 in which you used a quality dither you should hear a difference in the overall mix quality.

Earbrass wrote:Hi all,

Maybe I'm missing something, but since the end product of the recording process will either be a 16bit/44.1KHz CD, or an mp3 which is far lower in quality, I really can't see why people are fussed about 24 bit sampling - especially if you're sampling off vinyl!!

I'm probably a real old fart by most of your standards - (I can remember when stereo LPs were the big breakthrough in sound quality!) - and I've welcomed each improvement in recording quality over the years, but I have to say I think the CD standard of 16-bit/44.1 is fine - I think very few people can really hear any difference above that. In fact, with the rise of the MP3, more and more people are listening to music at sub-CD spec, which I think is a sad step backwards.

an analogy would be - think of it in terms of digital cameras the higher the pixel rate the more resolution the sharper and more detail your image has.
when it's time to render this as a smaller image. you can be a lot more picky about the information you discard.

16bit is enough for me.

I would be interested if someone did A/B checks on sampled vinyl, one time with 16bit and the other with 24. Since Vinyl already reduces the frequencies of the recording due to the way of analog processing, I would like to know, if recording it in 24bit is still an enhancement.

Okay, when you do actual recordings or effects processing, I think that 24bit is a step up in quality, but with vinyl samples?!?! And don't forget: what of this sound enhancement is left after converting it to 16bit to burn it on a CD?

I personally don't care about this discussion too much cause I've heard great sounding tracks in 16bit. But since I'm not a pro I cannot really estimate the importance of that issue.

Yeah, they could've made it 24bit for all the pro users, but still......Kanye for example is still bangin his stuff on an ASR and I still see loads of 2000 /2000xl around and these aren't 24bit either...

If you don't have material that requires 24bit such as vocals brass or live drums it's purely cosmetic. Vynil, CD's , or synths are far below even exploiting the dynamic range of even 16bit.

What most don't realize is that main drive toward 24/96 as a standard has more to do about 16bit being unprofitable than 24/96 invisible sonic advantages. Virtually ever patent granted at the solidification of Orange and Red book are all expired and public domain. That also extends to the players themselves.

DVD is now on it's deathbed for the same reasons. Hence blu-ray HDDVD wars.

They definitly should have gone with the 24 bit. The machine looks really nice but 128 ram? and 16 bit totally kill it. A couple of years ago I was testing a apogee minime and the mpc 4000 to cut samples and - granted hearing has alot to do with what your expecting - was blown away by how good the mpc 4000 on 24 bit was in comparison. The dynamics were really good it sounded "just like before". So going down to 16bit is crazy. If anyone says they can´t hear the difference they should cut a sample on the mpc 4000 in 16 and 24 bit. It´s tangible. The whole 12 bit-grit discussion being left out of these considerations..... If you want a clean non-tinted sample then 24 bit akai is the way to go.
greets

I had a 4000 and without dynamic material that needs it , the higher bit depths are cosmetic for spec junkies. Sample a CD at 24/96 and will sound absolutely no better than the original 16bit CD.

moyphee wrote:If you don't have material that requires 24bit such as vocals brass or live drums it's purely cosmetic. Vynil, CD's , or synths are far below even exploiting the dynamic range of even 16bit.

depends on what type of music you do - if it's pop, hiphop, techno etc... this may be the case - but classical - guitar and more acoustic forms of music a greater dynamic range is paramount. not everyone uses their mpc for just the popular genres.

moyphee wrote:What most don't realize is that main drive toward 24/96 as a standard has more to do about 16bit being unprofitable than 24/96 invisible sonic advantages.

if what you say is correct that 16bit is unprofitable -then you would have thought akai would go for 24bit for 5000 -

moyphee wrote:Virtually ever patent granted at the solidification of Orange and Red book are all expired and public domain. That also extends to the players themselves.
DVD is now on it's deathbed for the same reasons. Hence blu-ray HDDVD wars.

i'm afraid that's just the drip drip of capitalism - it exists through all product ranges - competition is a driving force for quality development .
and advancement comes at the cost of built in obsolescence.

with the 5000 i just feel akai have lost their cutting edge,it's all a bit carpet slippers and pipe these days, instead of on the pulse. -unlike the days when they made big advancements such as the S1000, MPC3000 etc...

overall i think people were excited about the 5000 but just expected a little more - especially for the price.
people on the forum should critique the 5000 - it's all customer feedback at the end of the day. even if some of it comes across as negative. it should help them stay sharp, and ultimately see them get back on top someday.