Actually, I disagree... until you output your master, I think your renders and channel exports should be 32-bit.  If you are sending your work off for contract mix-down or mastering, then it is really going to be far better to hand off a 32-bit file to the engineer - even if you don't clip ... and you still shouldn't - try to stay below -6dB even in 32 bit before you've got your mixed down master.  FP just does a much better job of expressing the curves of your wave (16-bit FP would actually be better than 16-bit integers for audio as well).

Your engineer may want to perform most of his work in 32 bit, but if you don't provide him with 32-bit files, that's going to mean a conversion... so, you get minor artifacts from this downsampling.  Not a massive amount of artifacts, but it really pays to try not to introduce more artifacts to your process than necessary.  That's not to say the engineer will necessarily do this, but forcing them to work in 24 bit may not be the best option either.


Once it's mastered, then 16 bit integer is probably sufficient, 24 bit is fine but probably overkill... but until you have a master, my opinion is that you should stick with 32 bit FP.

So, wait... FL doesn't use 32 bit FP internal mixing?

Looks interesting, but after I've gone through the waiting for the download thing, I get a 404.

If the loop uses these three notes then the loop can POTENTIALLY be used in either of these keys. However it CANNOT be in both at the same time.

No, that's not what I was saying.  What I was saying is that if the loop only uses those three notes, which is not uncommon in, say, bass loops or some other types of loops, then it is flexible, it is not in either key, the only strong indicator for it is that it has F as a root note.  It is the other notes in the scale that indicate major or minor, not the 1st, 2nd or 5th note of the scale.


I have seen a whole lot of bass loops that do not use the entire scale, many of which only use the Tonic, or the Tonic and the Fifth.  The Second, not so much, but it would still not have an impact.

Is it necessarily either?  If it only uses the 1st (F), 2nd (G) and the 5th (C), then it works for both.  In my sample collection, most of the time, when there's no M or m, then it has been both.

SomeDude - How do you account for a mono soundfield when you do that?  It's something I had been toying with, as I mention above, but since I need my tracks to be playable in a club, I ended up scrapping the idea as "cool, but not usable to me."

Yeah, I do this in particular with the basses, below say 250-311Hz or so, it varies depending on the key of my project... I'll use sidechaining to cut the low end in other tracks to leave space for the kick.  It's similar to sidechain compression, but removes some of that "breathing" quality you can get from ducking your bass in time to your beat.


I was also recently reading a short book on mixing where it was suggested that you can move your bass out to the sides of your stereo spectrum if you want to leave room for your kicks, and I thought to myself "Hey, I bet I could sidechain that so that the low frequencies of my bassline move to the sides when the kick hits so that I am reducing the sound even less."


However, then it hit me - this wouldn't do anything at all in mono, so... I scrapped the idea.  Pity, though, it seemed like a sexy idea.  It makes me want to start having mono versions of my tracks for DJs to play in the clubs, and stereo versions for headphones and home stereos and such.