Best audio quality

I'm an old Digital Performer/Motu/oiV user. I have a bunch of old stereo audio tracks on DAT & cassette I want to archive by loading into Garageband to make sound files from to put into iTunes and make into CD's. What is the best quality audio input for undertaking a project like this? Is the built in stereo input good enough? How is iMac and Garage band at handling hours of audio load? Should I mix to an external hard drive like I used to? I'm not sure of the professional quality of Garageband in today's world. I'm guessing compared to Digital Performer/G4/Motu of seven or so years ago it may be similar? (Also, what is a good input for a phantom power Neuman mic these days?) I feel like a cave man. Thanks!

If you are a registered owner of DP you can upgrade.
Limitations?....While there are more, for me it's usually editing and routing limitations where I bump my head on the ceiling. Some have workarounds...like locking tracks and getting inside the package contents to pull out the audio files to drag into another DAW...etc.
Usually not a deal breaker for most users...
If you do find it's time to move on, Logic Express may be of interest as you can open GB files in Logic and Express.
Reaper is another nice DAW that is also inexpensive....free to try and two different license prices.
There are plenty of consumer/prosumer priced interfaces...and converters have come a long way since DP3.
Good compatible drivers with frequent updates, features and I/O tend to separate them out.
Things like balanced outputs, decent mic gain, midi and digital I/O, built-in DSP and aggregate device capability may be salient to you.
As mentioned Motu tends to be rock solid on Mac's. But of course there are plenty of others.
Apogee, Presonus, Focusrite, Alesis, Tascam etc., all have their advocates for consumer priced interfaces.

Similar Messages

  • What settings give the BEST audio quality (original audio CD to iTunes)

    Further to my last post, can ya'll PLEASE help me get the bottom of this? I have heard so many different opinions & need to resolve ASAP....
    What pref' settings will give me the VERY BEST audio quality, when importing original audio CD's into iTunes 4?
    File size is of no issue (I have TONS of storage). I aim to import all at the highest quality possible (files need to be "broadcast quality" - for playing through a big PA system). I have been advised to either.....
    1. Import using the AAC encoder at a stereo bit rate of 320 kbps with a sample rate of 48.000 kHz.
    2. Import using AIFF (lossless uncompressed).
    3. Import using Apple Lossless (lossless compressed).
    WHICH ONE SHOULD I USE? Bearing in mind that the files will be played LOUD through a professional PA system & I'd prefer the crowd not to notice a significant diference between iTune files & orginal audio CD's (I will be spining both, side by side).
    Cheers - Sweetamix.

    You are finding out that the answer to this question tough. Everyone has their own opinion on this one.
    I saved the responses to a topic I opened six months ago on this same subject. I saved them and cut and pasted them into one document. Here were the answers I received. Good luck. bob
    Subject: Re: Classical Music & Bitrate
    Date: Sunday, June 26, 2005 11:12 PM
    To: <[email protected]>
    RE: Classical Music & Bitrate
    My experience with classical music (and music in general) is that the higher the bitrate, the better the quality and richness of the music. On the other hand, there is a limit to how much distinction your ears can make, and I think that anything above 192 kbps (mp3 format) is not significantly better (and not worth the larger file size). And in terms of volume adjustment, I personally have not found any need for it.
    RE: Classical Music & Bitrate
    I copied the same CD to my computer in 128, 160, 192, and 320 bitrates, and I couldn't tell a difference between any of 'em. I was listening to them with Grado SR60 headphones too.
    RE: Classical Music & Bitrate
    I’m sure you will get several if not many responses. You may also find they vary with the preference of the individual. However there are some rules of thumb. Generally speaking I think you will indeed find the higher the bit rate brings you closer to the CD sound.
    Certainly, 32-bit rate does not offer very good sound quality. Actually going from 32 to 320 should have been noticeably better, if not…. Then you’re in good shape. Because what you don’t know is there, can’t be missed.
    Also, the bit rate is only part of the equation. What format codec <http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=51910> are your songs ripped to.
    Consider the following - iPod: About compatible song formats
    <http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=61476>
    MP3 (from 32 Kbps to 320 Kbps)
    MP3 Variable Bit Rate (VBR)
    AIFF
    WAV
    M4A AAC
    Apple Lossless Encoder
    It sounds to me as though your songs may be in MP3 format. As a suggestion you might try ripping your CD’s to 128 AAC format. The general consensus is that AAC is better than MP3. Give it a shot…for the heck of it, and see what you think.
    Finally in the end…..it matters little what we all might think….If you think your sounds are better ripped at a MP3 320 bit rate……Great. If not…experiment, and play around till you find what sounds wonderful to you!
    RE: Classical Music & Bitrate
    Sorry for taking so long to get back to this thread: had two twelve-hour work days in a row.
    I did a Get Info on a typical piece in my iTunes and got this
    Kind: AAC Audio File
    Bit Rate: 128kb (have some at 192 & 2 or 3 at 320)
    Sample Rate: 44.100 kHz
    Profile: Low Complexity
    Channels: Stereo
    Volume: +2.3
    I was troubled that one responder couldn't tell the difference among 128, 160, 192, and 320 bitrates even using Grado SR60 headphones!
    And another seems to be of a similar opinion when he says that I think that anything above 192 kbps (mp3 format) is not significantly better (and not worth the larger file size). Does this apply to AAC format, too?
    However, I am going to continue to add tunes at the 320 bitrate - for a while - because I swear that I can tell a difference when I play them over my car radio via the cassette adapter.

  • Question on best audio quality for web

    I am making a web series and I want the audio to be the best it can be, I have already tried to output it as an H.264 but the audio levels are very low and the levels are off.
    Any tips??

    Do you know how to use soundtrack pro? you can use it to set your maximum level to -1 db, and then when you export your file from FCP, you'll have great levels for the web.

  • Online Number - Country vs. Audio Quality

    Hi,
    I am about to buy a Skype Online Number for a call that I will receive next week from someone in the UK, and I will be in Brazil. My question is -- for the best audio quality, should I buy a UK or Brazilian number?
    Thanks!
    Regards,
    Guilherme

    If the other person has a smartphone I recommend using Viber.Totally free and excellent quality. if you must use Skype buy the UK number as it will be cheaper for them to call you. Call quality is all about luck.

  • Keeping high audio quality, despite Pr Pro Audio Conforming

    I'm working on a film project, which will be edited in Premiere Pro.  I am recording most of the audio at 24/96 .wav files.  There will however be some audio files recorded at 16/48 compressed, coming from different sources.  This is unfortunately unavoidable.  SO, upon digging in the Adobe help sections, I found that if I start my project and set the sequence settings for audio to a sample rate of 96 (or 96,000), Prem Pro WILL NOT CONFORM my 24/96 .wav files.  (Pr Pro will not conform uncompressed audio of a supported format if it is brought into a sequnce where the sample rate of the sequence is the same as the clip.) This is great.  My 24/96 files will hold their quality all the way through the process.  It will however conform the other files such as the 16/48 compressed files.
    So here's my question.  (Keep in mind that my final product will be exported to 24/96.) I can take all my 16/48 audio files and convert them to uncompressed 24/96 before bringing into Prem Pro and then Prem Pro won't conform them at all.  So what will yield the best audio quality - a 16/48 audio file that has been conformed by Prem Pro and then during the export done by Prem Pro converted to 24/96, or will the audio quality be higher if I convert that 16/48 audio file first to 24/96 and then bring it into Prem Pro, where it won't be conformed by Prem Pro at all?  In other words, for best audio quality, do I let Prem Pro conform my 16/48 files and then convert them to 24/96 during export, or do I do the 16/48 converstion to 24/96 in another program like Audition?
    (((And yes, the higher audio quality matters.)))
    Thank you

    matt_gh2 wrote:
    I'm working on a film project, which will be edited in Premiere Pro.  I am recording most of the audio at 24/96 .wav files.  There will however be some audio files recorded at 16/48 compressed,
    Thank you
    If these files are .wav files then they aren't compressed just a lower sample rate and bit depth. There shouldn't be any difference in quality between the Premiere up converted or the Audition up converted files, although I would trust Audition a bit more than Premiere to do an accurate conversion.
    Not really sure why you need to work at 96K, it just uses more resources but it is worth keeping the sored files as at least 24bit. Since Audition works at 32bit floating point bit depth as it's native format it may be that your saved files from Audition are 32bit and that is what Premiere is choking on.

  • When playing any audio the audio quality on my Thunderbolt display steadily worsens over an hour period and becomes garbled. Restarting the media player fixes it. Does not occur when MacBook Pro is undocked.

    When playing audio/video on my MacBook Pro docked to Thunderbolt display the audio quality steadily worsens until it is garbled beyond understanding. I don't know if it occurs when using the MacBook undocked. It takes about an hour to become noticeable and steadily worsens. Simultaneously when the computer speaks the time this is also gargled. As the problem develops it sounds like there is a static halo around each spoken word.

    Hi GeoChester,
    Welcome to the Apple Support Communities!
    I understand that you are experiencing some sound issues on your Mac that worsens over time. In this situation, the first troubleshooting step that I would recommend would be to reset your computer’s PRAM. To do this, please follow the instructions in the following attached article. 
    OS X Yosemite: Reset your computer’s PRAM
    Best regards,
    Joe

  • Audio Quality in different mo

    Is there a significant Audio Quality difference specifically in Entertainment and Gaming mode ? as i noticed better dynamics and high tones on entertainment mode but those can be easily replicated with the proper EQ changes on gaming mode, Its really a hassle to change modes everything i game or play movies/mp3. also im aware that theres a smart mode changers but dont wanna more apps running on my system as there are already tons of it

    The mode changer is less than half a megabyte and only uses about 980kb of ram. Also, for music, Audio Creation mode with bit-matched playback enabled is the best thing to use. Preferably using winamp with an ASIO or kernel streaming output plugin.Message Edited by 003 on 05--2006 06:3 PM

  • A few questions - audio quality, and remote capability

    1) What is the audio quality of songs streamed from airplay?
    2) Is there any way to change the volume of a song using the iphone/ipad remote?
    Thanks!

    Hello..
    Not sure about the actual specs of Airplay SQ.
    Using the ATV2 to access your iTunes Library you must control the volume with the volume control of the device through which you have the audio routed.. ie TV or Stereo. There is no volume level on the ATV2 remote or in the interface of the ATV OS that I can see.
    Using the ATV2 as a speaker for iTunes from your Mac or PC you can control the volume through iTunes on the Mac or PC.
    Using the Remote App on iPhone 4 or other device you can control iTunes on your Mac or PC. In addition you can select the ATV2 as a speaker for iTunes directly from the Remote App and in turn have control of the volume from the iPhone 4.
    I like the last way best. Easier to navigate library, make selections and control volume all from anywhere within range of your wifi connection.
    Message was edited by: rz22g

  • Best audio settings for mp3?

    Hi everyone,
    I was wondering what are the best audio settings for an mp3 to import into C4?
    Thanks,
    Tina

    Yes Tina,
    I had this issue before. here is what i found:
    Record at Sample rate 44100 Hz, 16 bit, high quality publish as MP3
    Captivate settings at near CD bitrate 96 kbps,
    encoding speed 0,
    44.100 KHz encoding frequency

  • What is the best audio interface?

    Hi,
    I want an audio interface for around £100 to allow me to record vocals and guitar into my macbook pro.
    I was wondering if anyone on this forum would be able to help me decide which is best (latency/quality) etc.
    So far, i've found these two which i think one of them is probably my best option - i just don't know which one:
    http://www.gak.co.uk/en/alesis-io-2-portable-usb-audio-interface/624
    http://www.gak.co.uk/en/m-audio-fast-track-usb-v2/30573
    Oh, and i will only be playing my guitar through a jack, not mic'ed up. So that won't be an issue with the M Audio.
    Thank you in advance,
    Tom.

    Before doing anything, might be a good idea to try a couple of things.
    First, re-install the control panel software then repair permissions.
    try the fp10's
    If that fails, reboot the Mac, set the Fp10's up the way you normally use them, then open Activity Monitor and Quit or Force Quit and running Presonus applications.
    Try the fp10s.

  • Best audio connection

    Best audio connection ?
    a) itunes computer via RCA stereo connection to home theatre
    b Itunes computer streamed to Apple TV , Apple TV connected via optical cable to home theater
    c) this I have not tried ... Itune computer connected  directly via HDMi to home theater
    Also does the sound-card in the computer make a difference ?
    Antoine

    I have Fredereih ataxia so my only hobby left is musique and no way I have the dexterity to insert a cd in a tray, I have 400 cd's all ripped at 196kb.
    I love my Ipad with Itunes and the remote app to take control of my 5 computers in the house.
    My apple tv is ok but I do not have a good internet connection.
    In the room where I listen the most music, I have a small EEE laptop.
    it is directly connected on a 925 pioneer receiver with 9 speakers (RCA)
    Also in this room I have the apple TV connected via the Digital audio cable
    Recently (I'm  in Canada ) I have been using RDIO (Like  Pandora) , they claim sending in  256  kb.
    I  now notice that here is  a difference in Quality for the same file sent it different ways.
    played directly from the Pc is not as good as if I use Airplay ?
    a) should I resample my 400  cd's at 320kb ?
    b) should     I buy another Laptop with a good soundcard and  a HDMI output.
    I would appreciate any recommandation for any laptop under 1000$ ( Only Itune will be o n it.
    Regards
    Antoine

  • Can I modify the Export to... iTunes settings for better audio quality and compression?

    I am working on some Music Videos to DJ at a party with, I notice that when I export them as .mov files with Final Cut HD Express, they have 320 kbps and 44.100 kHz in the audio compression settings. Once I export them in Quicktime 10.2, using the File / Export to... / iTunes drop down menu, the Second, (ipad, iphone 4, & AppleTV) setting (not using HD, so the Mac and PC tab is not an option.) The final exported file, that plays great in itunes, appletv, ipad, etc. has a reduced quality audio of Bit Rate of 159 kbps (instead of 320 kbps) and Sample Rate of 32.000 kHz (instead of 44.100 kHz). Is there anyway to change these preset settings somehow?
    The Formats on the File / Export / menu are even less dinamic?
    I also noticed that some of the Music videos I purchased from the itunes store some years ago, have a 256 Kbps and 44.100 kHz setting. Which is better quality than the ones exported from Quicktime 10.
    I thought maybe with Quicktime 7 Pro, I could fine tune all the presets, but it got too complicated for me, might this be an option? What would the settings be?
    Using Widescreen 853 x 480 at full quality .mov file.
    thanks.

    I am working on some Music Videos to DJ at a party with, I notice that when I export them as .mov files with Final Cut HD Express, they have 320 kbps and 44.100 kHz in the audio compression settings. Once I export them in Quicktime 10.2, using the File / Export to... / iTunes drop down menu, the Second, (ipad, iphone 4, & AppleTV) setting (not using HD, so the Mac and PC tab is not an option.) The final exported file, that plays great in itunes, appletv, ipad, etc. has a reduced quality audio of Bit Rate of 159 kbps (instead of 320 kbps) and Sample Rate of 32.000 kHz (instead of 44.100 kHz). Is there anyway to change these preset settings somehow?
    Your question basically has too facets. The first is the quality of the source audio in terms of sampling rate and data rate. Under normal circumstances you don't want to export the audio using a sample rate or per channel data rate that is lower than your original source if you are trying to maintain the quality as high as possible and, on the other hand, you don't want to use settings greater than the source values since they increase the final file size without improving the quality of the audio.
    The second is the workflow. Since you indicate you are using FCE HD for editing, then using QT X to re-export the data seems somewhat redundant. While it has been many, many years since I last used FCE HD, if I remember correctly, you have both "Export QT Movie" and "Export using QT Conversion" options. The first option takes the audio and video format in which you are editing and merely copies the edited data in that format to a new MOV file container. On the other hand, the second option allows you export the edited data format directly to a user selected compression format using user selected options (but does assume the user knows how to best use these options). These are, BTW, the same export options available in QT 7 Pro.
    I thought maybe with Quicktime 7 Pro, I could fine tune all the presets, but it got too complicated for me, might this be an option? What would the settings be?
    What is so difficult here? If the source is DVD stereo quality (usually 48.0 KHz @ 192 Kbps then set your output for stereo 48.0 KHz @ 192 Kbps. If you wish to save a bit of file space, the you can use 48.0 KHz @ 160 Kbps but that is normally as low as I go. As to setting combinations in QT 7 Pro, once you set the sampling rate, the application becomes cuntextually adaptive and will only allow you to select data rates that are "standards" compliant and non-compliant ones are automatically greyed out. Rendering quality settings are self-explanatory. These are the basics if you are using a preset option like the "Movie to MPEG-4" export option. If using more complex options like the "Movie to QT Movie" option, then you will need to also consider how you plan to use your file to select the correct encoding strategy. For instance, a constant bit rate is good for optical media from the standpoint of providing a constant flow of data to the player. Unfortunately, this is not very efficient since it forces the quality to vary as it maintains the constant data rate. A variable but contarined data rate is also good for optical media or fast start online files but allows the data rate to vary between user selected data rate excursions and thus provides improved quality over the constant data rate strategy. The variable data rate allows the user to target a specific level of audio quality and will then allow the data rate to vary as needed to maintain a constant level of quality. This option is better suited for playback on a computer since the bit rate can vary greatly in magnitude. The average setting allows the user to target a specific average target data rate but allows it fluctuate as the encoder applies predictor-corrector adjustments. This option, like the constant data rate option, is good for average complexity content when creating a target file of predictable size but can somtimes have problems towards the end of the file if the content suddenly becomes more complex than predicted.
    Using Widescreen 853 x 480 at full quality .mov file.
    I would rarely recommend using the full quality slider setting. This is more of a redundancy setting forcing the encoder to recycle through certain encoding routines in an effort to improve quality without increasing the data rate. You would like do better to increase the video data rate limit and decrease the quality slider to something in the 50 to 80% range. You also indicate the files are 853x480. Such files are frequently the result of anamorphic widescreen MPEG-2 or DV source files. If so, I would normally recommend retaining this anamorphic strategy by encoding the H.264 video at the same 720x480 matrix dimensions and allowing the player to properly display the files at their targeted aspect ratio. This strategy will either allow for slightly better quality at the current video data rate setting or allow the user to retain the current level of quality using a slightly lower data rate which, in turn, means a slightly smaller final file size.

  • Does Encoding AAC Files with VBR on Improve Audio Quality ?

    Does Encoding AAC Files with VBR on Improve Audio Quality ?
    Are there Disadvantages ?
    Bonus Question 1:
    Usually, an 'auto' type encoding tool will screw up the natural flow of the music and miss subtle changes in the energy, volume, etc.. -stuff that is just to subtle for it to catch -Generally I wouldn't trust an 'auto' type setting to pick up this subtle stuff. Yet people say using VBR improves sound quality (and NOT file size). Why and how ?
    Bonus Question 2:
    What is the max bit rate VBR uses ? If I set my AAC encoder to 320 kbps and turned VBR off, wouldn't the sound quality be superior to encoding with VBR on (simply because the kbps are set at 320 the whole time...) ? Sure, the files encoded with VBR off would be larger, but wouldn't the quality be better ?
    Bonus Question 3:
    Lastly, I did a little test and encoded one song with VBR off and one with VBR on. The VBR song was 1.5 MBs bigger - Huh, I thought, is that increased file size the result of improved resolution throughout the whole song, or just one little section (haven't had time to listen to them)?
    Message was edited by: temptemp9

    These are some pretty tough questions. I like VBR encoding in general, as it does allow for more complex passages to take advantage of higher bit rates while less complex passages fall back to a lower bit rate, while keeping within fairly consistent file size parameters. Whether VBR yields better results at different target/average bit rates is another matter, and really requires that you encode and properly test output files before deciding on anything but "recommended" settings.
    At maximum lossy bit rates of 320 kbps, it doesn't make sense to use VBR. If I recall, the LAME MP3 encoder presets actually preclude VBR encoding for the highest quality files, and the same may be true for iTunes AAC.
    I have to admit that to speak with any certainty or confidence about the issues surrounding your various questions, one would really need to encode a bunch of files with iTunes from lossless sources and test them in software such as foobar2000. I could investigate this easily on my own PC, but I don't encode music at 320 kbps AAC, since I have enough disk space to just listen to lossless files. iTunes doesn't display dynamic bit rate changes as foobar2000 does, and I haven't come across any Mac software that does as good a job of allowing for proper testing as foobar2000 for Windows does.
    If you really need definitive answers to these three questions, then I think your best bet would be to do as I've hinted and use iTunes and foobar2000 if you've got access to a Windows computer to do this testing and evaluation for yourself, or sign up for a user account at Hydrogenaudio and post the same message there.

  • "audio quality" Audigy 2 vs. Nforce onboard

    5"audio quality" Audigy 2 vs. Nforce onboardS hi everyone,
    i bought myself an old Audigy 2 from Ebay a week ago, hoping i can increase my fps ingame on my old 2200+ computer.
    i really felt the increase, especially in Doom 3. But today i threw out the Audigy again.
    the bass from my subwoofer (teufel concept e mpe) is sooooo weak (in games and winamp) and sounds like a cheap passi've subwoofer.
    i tested every single setting, hoping to get a better sound out of it, but it didn't work. the bass just feels "weak".
    i'm pretty surprised, because i thought i'd get at least the same sound quality.
    does anyone have experiences with that? i can't believe the onboard sound is better than the Audigy's!
    i set the frequency for subwoofer to 20hz, increased the volume of the subwoofer, changed the equalizer.
    but it just sounds like a passi've sub and "cheap". (sry my english isn't good enough to find fitting adjecti'ves)
    can anyone help me with that? does anyone have the same problem?
    thanks in advance.

    Meocene wrote:
    If you used the auto update function you're probably already using the latest drivers. However if you didn't then definately install Dan K's pack - they're the best drivers currntly available for the Audigy 2. You'll want to uninstall the previous drivers, then do a clean up using Driver Sweeper beforehand though - Creative's drivers can be problematic
    The problem with the Audigy 2 is that its analog output quality isn't especially good anymore, when compared to newer devices - even onboard. This is demonstrated when and if you swicth over to use Dolby Digital Li've.
    I'm assuming the sound quality improvment I got has got to do with the fact that when using DDL, the Audigy's DACs and other analog components are skipped because the audio signal is being sent straight out, digitally, to my reciever.
    The audio quality improvement I got was huge, to the extent that, eax/gaming aside, I can't actually hear the difference between an X-Fi and my Audigy anymore. Before using DDL li've the difference was obvious.
    It may simply be that your nForce's analog output is of a higher quality.
    Analog quality aside though, the Audigy 2 is still the better device, or at least the more capable. It really depends on whether or not you're a gamer I suppose.
    If you've got a digital reciever then try the DDL pack and connect your Audigy to your reciever using the digital output.
    If not, and you're not a gamer, then I'd stick with your nForce if that sounds better? < - this being advice I'd imagine you must find rather anoying.
    Message Edited by Meocene on 08-0-2009 03:5 AM
    thanks for these informations.
    unfortunately i can't use DDL, because i don't own a receiver.
    music is at the moment the more important thing, i'm gaming about 4 hours a week.
    i'll keep the audigy though, maybe i'll rebuild an old 3000+ system i still have. (the sound THERE really sounds crappy)
    thanks for all answers and your help!
    EDIT: does the usual audigy 2 driver panel look like this: http://www.hartware.de/showpic.php?type=review&id=606&path=/media/reviews/606/xfi_screen_thx_big.jpg
    it's a screenshot from an x-fi card.
    mine looks different!
    Message Edited by chackachacka on 08-0-2009 0:33 [email protected]

  • Creating the Best Video Quality for YouTube Using FCE

    Hey guys, have a quick question.  I'm making drum covers for YouTube, and I want the best possible quality for my viewers.  I use Final Cut Express 4.0.1 on my MacBook Pro, and Log and Transfer the video footage from a HDR-CX160 Sony AVCHD Handycam.   What are my best options? 
    Thank you!
    Justin

    In every aspect of life there is no such thing as one best option as it all depends on your particular circumstances.
    Here is a good starting point for you to decide what suits you best.
    When you have edited your project in FCE try these settings:-
    Select File>Export>Using QT Conversion.
    Click the "Options"  button and when the the Options window opens you will see  "Size", "Settings" and "Sound" buttons.
    Click the Size button and set 1920 x 1080
    Click  the Settings button and  select:-
    Compression Type . . . . H.264
    Frame Rate . . . . . . . . . Current
    Key Frames . . . . . . . . . Automatic
    Compressor Quality . . . High
    Encoding . . . . . . . . . . "Faster" encode will give almost the same quality as "Best" but is twice as fast - your decision!
    Data Rate . . . . . . . . . . Restrict to 10,000kbps  (Don't use a comma when you enter the number)
    Then click the "Audio" button and make sure that AAC has been selected.
    These settings should give very good quality results fairly quickly, which should play well. Your file size will be around 5GB per hour.
    Some people prefer to use the smaller 1280 x 720, in which case the Data Rate should be 5,000kbps.
    I suggest you do a quick test with a film under one minute long to see how it looks as there is nothing worse than spending hours encoding a long project only to find that the settings were unsuitable.

Maybe you are looking for