Audacity 32bit 96k to 16b 44k?

[clashradio]

sorry, couldn't delete post. Check next message....

[clashradio]

Hey Scott,

Again, good job on the eq'ing. It sounds great. I'm impressed.

I think I have the conversion down, but...

I'd like to record directly with SoundForge, but still can't get any signal in. That's why I used Audacity in the first place. I did what ya said; Options, Preferences, Audio (Microsoft Sound Mapper, Direct Sound Surround Mapper, Windows Classic Wave Driver, Focusrite USB 2.0 Audio Driver). No input signal on any. I did try the Advanced tab also. However, when I click on Advanced in the Focusrite option, there is a box called Configure, and the program Scarlett Mix Control opens when I click Configure. Since no signal is getting to the Scarlett program, I'm guessing that's why I can't record in SF? yet I can in Audacity...

[Cornucopia]

I'm glad the conversion is at least one tried-and-true way for you to get what you want.

You could let it go at that, however, realize that there is some kind of underlying driver issue which is making your other device not be exposed.

Could be:
1. Not fully/completely installed correctly - Uninstall & try to re-install
2. Exists, but not directly visible on the top level of options - check w/in Sound Mapper, Classic Wave Driver, etc for sub-options
3. Is in conflict with some other hardware driver - My guess would be the Focusrite, since they're both USB Audio type devices. Could temporarily disable the Focusrite (in Device Mgr), which might free up and "enable" the other. Might take completely uninstalling both, rebooting, installing JUST the UBS Phono Plus, rebooting again.
4. Something else I cannot think of...

Glad you like the clip!
Since you were so complimentary, here is a copy of the title track from Joe's 2nd album (those that I restored)...
BTW, don't worry, as "remastering engineer", I have the right to copy/distribute these.

Scott

[2Bdecided]

Found a good link that describes nicely the pitfalls of digital audio (and how to avoid them).
http://forum.benchmarkmedia.com/discuss/feedback/newsletter/2010/08/1/unique-evils-dig...ow-defeat-them
Particularly like the idea of 16/44 being "fragile", compared to 24/96.

The proofs that 44.1kHz 16-bit is more than sufficient for home delivery are rather well hidden in that article. It does correctly say that (flat) dithered 16-bit is equivalent to analogue with 93dB SNR (and no analogue system has that high a signal to noise ratio!), it does correctly say that oversampling and downconverting to 44.1kHz gets you essentially perfect removal of aliasing - but there are screens full of information about the "evils" first. The jitter figures are so misleading it's laughable. Try: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=51322&st=25

The idea that all old CDs sound poor is junk too. Did Dire Straights Brother's in Arms sound terrible? Did classical labels clamour for digital recording in the late 70s (i.e. EVEN BEFORE CDs) because it sounded terrible and the analogue equipment they already had was better?

Also, I'm mildly surprised at David for presenting them (though I know it's for comparison's sake) as examples, when they are in aac/mp4/m4a format. (I would have thought he would avoid lossy-compressed audio). If I really wanted to WOW somebody and elicit balanced examples of A/B comparisons, I'd want to have 24/96 LPCM WAV clips to offer.

I posted those as examples of how good vinyl can sound when transferred properly. The quality of transfer transcends sample rate and lossy coding. They're not my samples, but I regularly post samples in mp3 when the fact that they're lossy does not harm their usefulness. If I was posting something to compare sample rates, or for further processing, then I agree: lossless would be vital.

Cheers,
David.