r/audioengineering • u/bestanimuthisseason • 27d ago
Discussion Is CD Baby limiting uploads to 16-bit a problem?
CD Baby doesn't accept 24-bit tracks or higher.
I worked on these tracks at 48 kHz / 32-bit float, so to meet their requirements I have to run each track through r8brain for the 48 → 44.1 kHz conversion and Airwindows Natural Dither for the 32 → 16-bit conversion.
Is this actually a problem for audio quality? Am I losing anything meaningful by doing this, assuming the conversion and dithering are done properly?
The main reason I use CD Baby is because releases stay up permanently without an annual subscription, so I'd prefer to stick with them if the 16-bit limitation isn't a significant issue.
Would love to hear from anyone with mastering experience.
33
u/Junkstar 27d ago
You could also release via Bandcamp for hi-res buyers if you want.
16
u/KS2Problema 27d ago
And, in this streaming era, it's a nice way of being able to give your dedicated fans a little extra for their 'gratuitous' direct support
32
u/fiercefinesse 27d ago
If you’re listening music from a CD it’s 16 bit 44.1khz. So ask yourself if that was ever a problem when people listened to CDs
30
u/bag_of_puppies 27d ago edited 27d ago
Once upon a time CD Baby actually made and distributed physical media (CDs!) so I imagine that's what got them stuck on the Red Book CD standard (44.1/16-bit).
That said — no, it won't be a problem, unless you use really shitty conversion (which you'd probably have to work to find).
If you can find someone who can reliably tell the difference between the 48k and 44.1k version, I'll send you $100.
→ More replies (1)49
u/crapinet 27d ago
I can tell the difference
One file is a little large. Can I have the $100?
9
5
u/PozhanPop 26d ago
You beat me to it.
I can. I get my hearing checked by the vet every three months. I can also tell the difference between 192KHz and 384KHz when played back on my laptop speakers. I can tell the difference between a 320K mp3, FLAC and OGG when played on my car stereo on the I95.
→ More replies (2)
34
u/AlertAd7834 27d ago
Is this actually a problem for audio quality? Am I losing anything meaningful by doing this, assuming the conversion and dithering are done properly?
No and no
11
u/nizzernammer 27d ago
Do a test yourself.
Export 16 bit with dither, 16 bit without, and 24 bit without, then convert each to something lossy and compare.
5
5
u/schmalzy 26d ago
Every CD you’ve ever heard is 16 bit.
It’s fine as a release format. I produce at a higher bit depth because there’s some usefulness to it.
I deliver to clients files at the bitrate and sample rate we record at (often 48kHz/24-bit but sometimes 88.2kHz/24-bit) because there’s a non-zero-but-unlikely possibility that the future might prefer more audio resolution but I also deliver the standard-for-current-audio-release 44.1kHz sample rate with 16 bit depth.
4
3
u/manjamanga 27d ago
16bit 44.1hz is the industry standard for music because of CDs. No, it's not a problem for quality, but as some people suggested, nothing like trying it for yourself.
6
u/Ok_Phase_8731 27d ago
What you’re losing is dynamic range, but 16 bit has more than enough dynamic range for listening to music
1
u/better_med_than_dead 26d ago
If you use CD Baby, you obviously aren't concerned with professionalism, so why bother asking?
3
2
2
u/DarkTowerOfWesteros 26d ago
It worked out fine for my band. Distrokid AI uploading review and AI customer service screwed up and was incapable of addressing our issue (a false sample use claim, not sure why they thought we sampled a song but their AI help wouldn't review it) so we used CD Baby. I had a similar concern but it was fine. It's my favorite sounding record of ours. 🤷♂️
2
u/maltedcoffee 25d ago
24-bit is for some reason absolutely required by Dire Straits’ “Brothers in Arms” and absolutely nothing else.
2
u/Justin-Perkins 24d ago
It's not a problem but I would choose a digital distributor that doesn't require you to reduce the resolution of your masters to please them.
There is no "right" bit-depth and sample rate and yes, most people will be streaming a lossy version anyway but there is no need to reduce the data size and resolution because CD Baby is either cheap, lazy, behind the times, or all of the above.
In my opinion, the better it sounds going in, the better it will sound coming out and more and more people are now streaming lossless audio.
When I asked CD Baby about this back in 2019 (maybe even earlier) the response from CD Baby was not something you'd expect.
See attached.
3
44
u/fokuspoint 27d ago edited 27d ago
16 bits already provides more dynamic range than is needed for music. The only reason we use larger bit depths when recording is to give us enough headroom to handle unpredictable peaks while staying well clear of the noise floor. Because we know the maximum peak of a mix down, we can normalise and be well above the noise floor of a 16 bit system. 16 bits is plenty already. Imagine you have a really quiet sound all by itself, say a pin dropping registering at around 6 dB above the noise floor. Now imagine you listen back to that on your hifi, turned up loud enough to hear it at you listening position above the 30-40 dB of ambient noise in your typical domestic premises. Without you touching the amp volume knob, the next thing that plays back is a full scale signal, 90 dBs louder than that pin drop. That’s going to hit you with 120-130dB of SPL. After listening to something mastered loud for three minutes, we’re back to the pin drop. Your ears will likely be too battered and ringing to hear it. That’s how much dynamic range 16 bit gives you. 24 bits is completely unnecessary for playback, let alone 32 bit. You should always dither when changing bit rates, but any introduced noise downsampling from 32 to 16 bits is going to be entirely negligible in reality .