The bus master works in 64bits?

I was wondering (really I think I know the answer but I would like to get an official response)

The bus master in Cubase 7 sums the tracks working in 32 or 64 bits of definition?

It sums in floating point.
16 bit = not so good.
24 bit = better than 16.
32 bit = better than 24.
64 bit = better than 32.
32 bit float = better tan 64 bit??? Or not… It gets pretty academic at this point, not even Batman and Superman combined can hear the difference at this point.
32 bit float gives practically unlimited dynamics.
Anyway, there are looong debates on this on the web, google a bit.

Yeah As far as saw (looking in the site and gooooogle ) it works in 32bit float, but not a single official response (I mean for steiny) says “32” or “64”

I know the difference is pretty “unhearably” (specially for me :laughing: ), but again, when used for mastering can be pretty important or when you want to use Cubase for audio analysis proposes, or software/plugin testing (sometimes I do)

It´s pretty official in the manual, so certainly they just do not want to repeat themselves over and over again…

Did you mean page 233 inside dither ?

What is a “lower resolution” then? Well, Cubase uses 32-bit float resolution internally, which means that all integer resolutions (16 bit, 24 bit, etc.) are lower.

32bit float is 24bit (mantissa) with the ability to scale by 8bits (exponent), so that using floating points means that intermediate summing points can exceed normal digital full scale that would otherwise overload a DAC, which must always have an input below full scale.

The downside is that resolution in arithmetic suffers when values are not in the same range. Using decimal to illustrate, subtracting 0.84 from 1.5 results in 0.7. Both have two digits of resolution, but the result only has 1 digit, because the least significant digit of the lesser value is ignored as it has no corresponding digit in the larger.

Of course, with 24bits of playroom, a single calculation is of no consequence as the lower bits are buried in the noise floor in the end. The problem comes when there are thousands or millions of calculations, because errors accumulate, especially for reverb, where results feed back into the next round of calculations. This all gets worse when the starting values are lower than full scale.

For this reason, some digital mixers use 48bit integer internal values, and some DAWs, like ProTools 11, use 64bit floating (known as double-precision, and it uses 53bits+11bit exponent), to provide extra ‘guard’ bits. These large precisions are overkill for audio, but some are what CPUs provide hardware support for besides 32bit (single-precision) floating, which results in significantly lower calculation times than if they were done in software at lower resolutions.

Great info, thank Patanjali

Here is a good one from SOS:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan08/articles/qa0108_3.htm

LOL!!! I love when people say, “its in the manual”, great response to the old Manual comment. LOL!!! I’m not surprised this answer came from Thinkingcap, he is great for arrogant and sarcastic comments that don’t even remotely help anyone, just pi$s people off in general.

Ever own a Kurzweil K2000 or any of the K series synths? They come with two manuals, each the size of a phone book, try reading those all the way through and remembering everything.

Question : hey can you tell me how to sync an LFO to midi clock?
Answer from jack a$s : look it up its on page 352 of manual number 2

If we are comparing manuals to phone books…
Of course, I don’t read the phone book all the way through when I sign up for phone service.
But, when I want to find someone’s phone number, I know how to look it up in the phone book.
I wouldn’t call someone else and then ask them to find it for me.
That is why a manual has a table of contents and an index.
:smiley:

Of course, but a phone book is simply an alphabetical list, with the sole content being a self-contained single string of digits with only one interpretation.

A manual for a program as complex as Cubase is nowhere near as linear, has many interrelations with material elsewhere in the manual, nor do the headings always convey the complete contents below them. And the complex nature of the material is not always readily understood from the text and pictures.

Just a few tedious ventures into the manual can be enough to dissuade one from choosing it as the first point of call.

I often find that the material seems to need experience with the program before one can understand it. If one is at the start of the experience ladder, then consultation with experienced users can short-circuit a lot of grief, and can be a whole lot quicker.

As a professional tech writer, I think the manual would need to be several times larger to adequately cover the knowledge and procedures required for a beginner. As it is, it is a rough indicator of Cubase’s facilities and a few of the possible usage scenarios.

Of course… And I don’t claim that every case of “RTFM” is justified but there are certainly times where the person asking the question is just being lazy.
The phone book example was somewhat of a “fun” example. Many better examples exist.

Tax attorneys don’t read the entire tax code but they know how to find the answer.
Doctors don’t read every medical publication but they know how to find an answer.
etc…
My point is that not reading the manual is not an excuse for not trying to find an answer.

Disturbing thought … the doctor of the coming generation goes on an online forum to ask about treating your illness because he’s too lazy to look it up … gives me shudders … :confused: :astonished: :open_mouth:

The bottom line is that if your response is RTFM, why even bother to respond. The point here is to help each other. If the answer is accessible easily be a response, then respond. No one comes here for parenting.

I might have had the same question, came here and found the answer easily because someone simply responded.
Now I have to come in, get annoyed and add to this nonsense.

This happens!

Doctors (and other professionals) use Google Scholastic when looking up things! I wouldn’t be surprised if they do not also use professional forums to clarify patient issues (anonymously for themselves and their patients, of course).

They do not have to take the advice verbatim, just as any of us do not have to here.

Hello,

again going off topic… I’m closing this thread… AGAIN!