Man, sampling straight into the OT is something I love to do on live stuff.
1 Like
for me the actual sampling is a key part of the features and flow.
if you have files, then the beauty of the OT is you can so easily drop them onto your CF in USB mode,
but ā¦ getting familiar with on the fly sampling inside the machine or of ABCD inputs is very useful to become comfortable with; it might even be a pristine sample you imported to the OT that you have FX slice lock mangled up in the OT in a sequence, you can then resample that inside the OT, isolate a snippet of, and off you go againā¦
2 Likes
Iām not trying to rip on this guy, he seems coolā¦
But not only was the OT probably in 16 bit, but also the mono vs stereo thing. Andā¦
How did he import to DT? If using transfer it just takes the left channelā¦
Weāre possibly comparing stereo dithered to 16 bit vs just the left channel 24 bitā¦ 
āEdit: Nevermind, brain glitch, he sampled directlyā¦
3 Likes
Personally I never had a problem with the OT sound quality sampling straight in, but you have to ensure that you are getting a healthy level into the OT, for me 16 bit is fine for almost everything as I donāt need huge dynamic range, and I never notice any drastic differences to the source material, it always sounds great to me.
4 Likes
I think he sampled it into the DT?
2 Likes
Oh right, I probably need more coffeeā¦ 
2 Likes
Aah someone put a comment there about the old Akai S20 pitching Ā±50!
I miss that!
1 Like
I always thought the comments about how different 16 vs 24 bit sampling sounds is greatly overstated as well
Regardless of what anyone thinks about the differences between sampling quality of these machines, by the time your track is finished and it is in the ear of your audience, none of it matters really.
3 Likes
I really appreciate you guys! Thank you for your wordsā¦ THANK YOU ALL SOOOOOO MUCH!!!
Edit: I knew you guys would give me the answers. You are where itās at!
1 Like
Agreed. 96db of dynamic range is good enough for me 
1 Like
Really it is just down to taste, I have both DT and OT and when in use they both sound fine, but in this video the OT sounded much better to me. I have records, tapes and CDs when listening to any of them they all sound fine, but most stuff sounds better on tape (to me) because I like the way it sounds, so I guess I donāt like tons of top end sizzle, I often find it fatiguing after a short time, even if initially impressive, but then again Iām kind of old school.
Similarly related - Iām not too keen on 4k TV, I donāt need or want to see skin pores on the actors faces, like Iām looking at their face through a magnifying glass 
5 Likes
shambles
1 Like
5 posts were split to a new topic: Off-topic chat (OT DT sampling thread)
Mario pffff he should have got an elektronaut on the phone!
Hopefully heāll do a follow up because it was a great presentation otherwise
1 Like
He should have called 
Helplineā¦ 
Every once in awhile Iāve started my response with:
Hello, and thank you for choosing helpline, for all of your OTing needs since 2011ā¦
and then end with:
Thanks again for choosing helpline, our other operators will be of further assistanceā¦
Yāall are helpline operators, you can use that too! Hahaā¦
3 Likes
I preferred the 16-bit OT audio over the DT. Does the MKII version sound much different? I wouldnāt want to lose that smudging in the mids and highs.
1 Like
I donāt understand the test at all. Why does he use 2 tests? He starts playing both machines after another with the original sample and then he plays them again with the og samples?
I listened with generic earbuds and the 2nd machine on the first round sounded very lofi compared to the 1st one. And not 16 bit but more like 12 bit lofi. Very weird.
I never cared a lot about dt vs ot sound quality but this test brought even more confusion to the topic imo. Which is cool i think because now the sound difference still remains a mistery somehow. 
16-bit vs 24-bit shouldnāt make a difference in how we hear it:
https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
Professionals use 24 bit samples in recording and production for headroom, noise floor, and convenience reasons.
16 bits is enough to span the real hearing range with room to spare. It does not span the entire possible signal range of audio equipment. The primary reason to use 24 bits when recording is to prevent mistakes; rather than being careful to center 16 bit recording-- risking clipping if you guess too high and adding noise if you guess too low-- 24 bits allows an operator to set an approximate level and not worry too much about it. Missing the optimal gain setting by a few bits has no consequences, and effects that dynamically compress the recorded range have a deep floor to work with.
An engineer also requires more than 16 bits during mixing and mastering. Modern work flows may involve literally thousands of effects and operations. The quantization noise and noise floor of a 16 bit sample may be undetectable during playback, but multiplying that noise by a few thousand times eventually becomes noticeable. 24 bits keeps the accumulated noise at a very low level. Once the music is ready to distribute, thereās no reason to keep more than 16 bits.
6 Likes