24/96 to 16/44.1 - Best Method?

Discussion in 'Mastering' started by mark4man, Jun 2, 2004.

  1. mark4man

    mark4man Active Member


    All set to perform bit format & sample rate conversions (in WaveLab) for CD pre-mastering...

    & I ran across an old e-mail response from one of the tech brains at Cakewalk (I was about to upgrade to SONAR; & asked them some basic questions regarding 24/96 to 16/44.1 conversions.)

    Up until I read this e-mail this evening, I was convinced I would perform the conversions in the digital domain...

    but the Support Tech from Cakewalk suggested that...because of the interpolation artifacts that the (digital) process introduces (no matter whose sample rate converters are used)...it's actually better to output the 24/96 file as analog; & recapture at 16/44.1...that the results have less inherent noise.

    So, I wanted to ask...

    What's the consensus in the forum?

    Who converts in the digital domain...who recaptures the analog file...

    ...what kinds of results do you get; & why.

    Thanks very much,


  2. Michael Fossenkemper

    Michael Fossenkemper Distinguished past mastering moderator Well-Known Member

    depends on what kind of gear you have. there are a few high end external SRC's out there that are excellent. As for software, Bararbach (sp) is pretty good. Most of the built in SRC's in applications aren't that good so an D/A/D option would be better if you have good converters.
  3. mark4man

    mark4man Active Member


    Thanks for the response...& I visted yoiur site. I'm in central Jersey. My compositions are various SONAR XL files (most of which are 16/44.1; & one at 24/96.) I wanted to use OasisCD as my replication house...but I wanted also to bring them a viable product.

    How could you help me with the in-between step?


  4. Michael Fossenkemper

    Michael Fossenkemper Distinguished past mastering moderator Well-Known Member

  5. joe lambert

    joe lambert Distinguished Member

    When we were mastering Steely Dans "Two Against Nature" (mastered here by Scott Hull) the files came in as 24bit 96K. All the processing was done at that rate in the digital domain. After editing in Sonic Solutions HD, we came out digitally into the Prism AD2 and converted to 16 44.1 internally then went directly to 1630.
    That record won 2 grammy's and is concidered one great sounding record.
    In that situation after doing several tests that method was chosen as sounding the best. I would do a test with your digital against anolog and see what you like best.
  6. mark4man

    mark4man Active Member


    Thanks very much. I don't know if I can spring for the AD-2 (at 7 grand)...but I have heard great things about them, from every quarter.

    Wow...were you involved at all on Everything Must Go? Saw them (the Dan) last summer...& were they smooth !!

  7. joe lambert

    joe lambert Distinguished Member

    I think they had Roger Nichols do it. He has been recording and mixing Steely D. since the very begining.
  8. JoeH

    JoeH Well-Known Member

    Well, Joe, I'm impressed with both your gear and the CD itself. "Two Against Nature" was my favorite CD of that year, and I was oh so sure it had NO CHANCE at the Grammies.

    You can imagine the hooting, cheering and hollering here at my house when I saw the damn thing win at the end of the show. (My son thought I was nuts, of course! :) I think I laughed and smiled for about 20 minutes afterwards. Fagan & Becker on top again, after alllll those years. ("In your FACE, Flanders!" Whooohooo!! :)

    The mastering, while transparant to all the casual end-users, was in no small way part of the disc's sound and success.

Share This Page