Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

General discussions on songwriting, mixing, music business and other music related topics.

Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby UserSince1993 » Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:24 pm

Hi All

So I have upgraded my audio interface and can now (in theory) record at 24/32bit up to 192khz -

There is an interesting read here on sample rates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_sampling_rate#Sampling_rate and some interesting points in it seem to say that the human ear can't determine a difference above 50khz - but that it higher rates do seem to have some kind of 'impact' -

So what's your preference? do you record above 48khz? do you think it makes a difference once mixed down?

I reproduced a small recording I had done at 24bit 44.1khz with 24bit 192khz today and I seem to be able to notice a 'richer sound' - but is that just placebo? I'm not sure -

I'd welcome all of your views - thanks v much - JS
Intel i7-4820k - 8GB RAM - Windows 8 64bit - 2TB Sata Drives - M-Audio NRV10 I/O Firewire & UR44 Audio Interface (USB) - Line 6 guitar tech - Various VSTs - SE microphones - Alesis Drums - Alesis Monitors - lots of other ' stuff ' - oh and Cubase 7.5
UserSince1993
New Member
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby distante » Fri Jun 06, 2014 4:26 pm

The human ear can't really hear the difference between a 48Kh recording or a 88Kh.

If you don't work with musicians or if you plan to do a lot of time/pitch process in your audios, the more sample rate you got, the less artifacts you will find.
Hear and See "Corazón" a Rock Song made with Steinberg's UR824 and Cubase 7

Do you want to show your music or any audio work made with Cubase? fb.com/groups/Made.With.Cubase/

My Stuff:
UR824 and Cubase 7 on Windows 8.1 ( PC 64bits system / Core i7 3773K )
Scarlett 2i2 and Cubase 7 on Windows 8.1 ( Laptop 64bits system )
*Always the latest version avariable.
A bunch of Mics, Pres and Toys, Plugins and Heart
User avatar
distante
Member
 
Posts: 568
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:30 pm
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby UserSince1993 » Fri Jun 06, 2014 4:29 pm

artifacts?
Intel i7-4820k - 8GB RAM - Windows 8 64bit - 2TB Sata Drives - M-Audio NRV10 I/O Firewire & UR44 Audio Interface (USB) - Line 6 guitar tech - Various VSTs - SE microphones - Alesis Drums - Alesis Monitors - lots of other ' stuff ' - oh and Cubase 7.5
UserSince1993
New Member
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby distante » Fri Jun 06, 2014 5:50 pm

Hear and See "Corazón" a Rock Song made with Steinberg's UR824 and Cubase 7

Do you want to show your music or any audio work made with Cubase? fb.com/groups/Made.With.Cubase/

My Stuff:
UR824 and Cubase 7 on Windows 8.1 ( PC 64bits system / Core i7 3773K )
Scarlett 2i2 and Cubase 7 on Windows 8.1 ( Laptop 64bits system )
*Always the latest version avariable.
A bunch of Mics, Pres and Toys, Plugins and Heart
User avatar
distante
Member
 
Posts: 568
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:30 pm
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby mroekalea » Fri Jun 06, 2014 6:22 pm

Humans hearing 50Khz?? I think that when you are young you could hear up to 20 or 22 Khz, when you're getting older it wil probably drop to around 16 or 18 Khz depending on how much volume voilence you had to bear your whole life.

What I heard from many People is that the frequencies above 20 Khz can influence the sound perception, more like I'm not hearing it but feel it.
Menoj
Win8.1, 3930K@3.2Ghz, 32GB, Cubase 8 pro & artist 8, wavelab 8 elements, HSO, RND Portico 5033, UR824+MR816X+Focusrite pro 26 IO, CC121, Cubase IC pro, Halion 5, VG2, Arturia AF, TRacks CS grand + all custom elements, BFD3, Amplitube 3 (fender, orange, SVX collections, slash), HSO library, Fender Jazz basses, tube amps and 12 inchers!
mroekalea
Member
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:12 am
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby distante » Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

mroekalea wrote:Humans hearing 50Khz?? I think that when you are young you could hear up to 20 or 22 Khz, when you're getting older it wil probably drop to around 16 or 18 Khz depending on how much volume voilence you had to bear your whole life.

What I heard from many People is that the frequencies above 20 Khz can influence the sound perception, more like I'm not hearing it but feel it.


I think the OP is refering to the sample rate. 50Khz is still high trought
Hear and See "Corazón" a Rock Song made with Steinberg's UR824 and Cubase 7

Do you want to show your music or any audio work made with Cubase? fb.com/groups/Made.With.Cubase/

My Stuff:
UR824 and Cubase 7 on Windows 8.1 ( PC 64bits system / Core i7 3773K )
Scarlett 2i2 and Cubase 7 on Windows 8.1 ( Laptop 64bits system )
*Always the latest version avariable.
A bunch of Mics, Pres and Toys, Plugins and Heart
User avatar
distante
Member
 
Posts: 568
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:30 pm
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby andyjh » Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:23 pm

The biggest problem with the theory that the frequencies you cannot hear affect the ones you can (anything above 20KHz). is that hardly any microphones or monitor speakers reproduce these frequencies anyway, so they are never there to perceive - whatever sampling frequency you use.


The only "sound difference" in high sampling rates is usually that of the D/A converter (quality of the aliasing filters), and that is in the end users CD player or computer (read - not very good).

How ever it is easier to design a cheap (poor) D/A running at 96KHz than one at 44.1KHz, as at 96KHz, you can heave really rubbish aliasing filters that do their job without affecting the audio.

So maybe the sampling rate is best higher for all the wrong reasons.
Master PC & Slave: Windows 7 64-bit / i7 / 24Gb RAM / Dual monitors / MOTU interfaces / Benchmark DAC
Networked via VE Pro
Equipment list: - more than I need
Plug in list:- definitely more than I need
andyjh
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 8:19 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby MrSoundman » Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:56 pm

Cubase Pro 8 x64 | WaveLab 8.5.10 x64 | HALion 5.0.1 x64 | HSO 1.5 x64 | Midex 3/Midex 8 | Windows 7 x64
User avatar
MrSoundman
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1094
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:27 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 48 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby curteye » Fri Jun 06, 2014 11:28 pm

Aloha guys,

Because of where I live I often get clients using solo instruments.

Slack key guitars/bamboo flutes/ukes/a single drum for chants/solo vox(s) etc etc

In these situations when using higher rates I can actually 'perceive' a diff.
And often some of these plays are 'purist'; in the sense that they want NO fx at all.
No comp no eq and no reverb/delay.

However when a 'typical' band comes in, it is 24/44.1 all the time.
I just can't hear/percieve a diff at higher rates in those scenarios.

{'-'}
If yer gear ain't breakin down, you aint workin' much.

iMac i7 2.8Gz 16GB 10.9...../C5.5/6.5/7.5
Mbook 2.4Gz 4GB 10.7.5.../C5.5/6.5/7.5

Location:
On the side of a volcano in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
User avatar
curteye
Grand Senior Member
 
Posts: 5274
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:03 am
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby iBM » Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:39 am

curteye wrote:However when a 'typical' band comes in, it is 24/44.1 all the time.
I just can't hear/percieve a diff at higher rates in those scenarios.

{'-'}
Nobody can. It is physically impossible to hear anything over 20kHz.
The human hearing has no mechanics, as in no haircells in our cochlea to convert soundwaves in the frequencies above 20kHz (after a few years only 16-18 kHz) into electric signals (this is the best A to D converter ever excisted - our hearing system).
We don't actually "hear", as the brain receives electric signals. Then we are (our brain is) interperating what's coming in. Ask any hearing doctor.

So 24/44.1 should be more than fine. If not....... if not your converters have bad filtering (Read andyjh's post again about filtering in 44.1 vs 96Khz - he is spot on).
If you hear a difference on 96k against 44.1k, it is not better in 96kHz. It is way worse in 44.1, due to bad filtering artefacts entering our hearing frequency range.

Then watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM

After that we can discuss.
I have read thousands of pages on this topic, attended seminars with the head master of TC. Electronics' digital research and developement, Thomas Lund. And I have read my share on the human hearing system.

The most important I have learned, is that we can't fight nature, pure math and physics. It is just physically impossible to hear anything over 20kHz.
TSR - Now a division under The Tower Studio Suite - Run by my uncles nephew

Win7/Win8 x64 | Intel i5 2500/3570K | 16 GB RAM | MOTU PCIe-424 w/ 24io x 2 / 2408 / 308
Cubase 6.5/7.5 - Nuendo 5.5 | CC121 | Slate Digital | Softube | Sonnox | SoundToys |
Eventide | Exponential Audio | Boz' Digital Lab | +++
Dynaudio BM15A | Focusrite ISA430 | Universal Audio LA-610SE/2-610/8110 |
TLAudio 5052/C1/PA-1 | TC Electronics R4000/M3000/M-One/D-Two | +++
User avatar
iBM
Member
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:49 am
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby curteye » Sat Jun 07, 2014 12:37 pm

iBM wrote:It is just physically impossible to hear anything over 20kHz.[/color][/b]


But can some people 'feel' it?
{'-'}
If yer gear ain't breakin down, you aint workin' much.

iMac i7 2.8Gz 16GB 10.9...../C5.5/6.5/7.5
Mbook 2.4Gz 4GB 10.7.5.../C5.5/6.5/7.5

Location:
On the side of a volcano in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
User avatar
curteye
Grand Senior Member
 
Posts: 5274
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:03 am
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby UserSince1993 » Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:25 pm

distante wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_artifact


Thanks that was a useful read

To the other guys who took the time to reply - thanks. I'm definitely talking about sample rate rather than frequency - I know Humans can't hear a frequency of 192khz ;o) -
Intel i7-4820k - 8GB RAM - Windows 8 64bit - 2TB Sata Drives - M-Audio NRV10 I/O Firewire & UR44 Audio Interface (USB) - Line 6 guitar tech - Various VSTs - SE microphones - Alesis Drums - Alesis Monitors - lots of other ' stuff ' - oh and Cubase 7.5
UserSince1993
New Member
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby andyjh » Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:57 pm

curteye wrote:
iBM wrote:It is just physically impossible to hear anything over 20kHz.[/color][/b]


But can some people 'feel' it?
{'-'}



No
Master PC & Slave: Windows 7 64-bit / i7 / 24Gb RAM / Dual monitors / MOTU interfaces / Benchmark DAC
Networked via VE Pro
Equipment list: - more than I need
Plug in list:- definitely more than I need
andyjh
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 8:19 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby iBM » Sat Jun 07, 2014 8:10 pm

curteye wrote:
iBM wrote:It is just physically impossible to hear anything over 20kHz.[/color][/b]


But can some people 'feel' it?
{'-'}

No. Not possible, within a musical context.
Think of how much energy it would take to make that "tickle" your skin.......... What happens when you feed (play back) a full range frequency signal with that amout of power. Your head would explode, literary.

There are no amplifiers able to feed that much power, to any speaker system, and to make anyone feel those upper frequencies.
We are obviously talking within a music production/playback context, and both speakers and eardrums, and probably our skull would blow to pieces.

If we are talking Ultra-sound and Roentgen in medical environment/tests (we MAY feel it), you have to have a High-pass filter in those medical equipment set very high (otherwise you would burn to death), to not break down the power supply for your whole city.

Said in another way. When you are at the physician taking Ultrasound treatment, you may feel a bit hot on your skin/muscle. If it were possible to remove the highpass filter in that equipment with a flick of a switch, you would blow up the building.

So in a fullrange frequency musical piece, to "feel" those upper frequencies, our heads had exploded a long long time before we could feel some content at 40kHz.

This is actually basic math and physics, and the human hearings limitations.

PS. The hard part in explaining math and physics related to music production, useful frequency range and the "law of the nature", is to do it as easy as possible. It's really hard to do it really easy :)

So don't fight nature, make music :mrgreen:
TSR - Now a division under The Tower Studio Suite - Run by my uncles nephew

Win7/Win8 x64 | Intel i5 2500/3570K | 16 GB RAM | MOTU PCIe-424 w/ 24io x 2 / 2408 / 308
Cubase 6.5/7.5 - Nuendo 5.5 | CC121 | Slate Digital | Softube | Sonnox | SoundToys |
Eventide | Exponential Audio | Boz' Digital Lab | +++
Dynaudio BM15A | Focusrite ISA430 | Universal Audio LA-610SE/2-610/8110 |
TLAudio 5052/C1/PA-1 | TC Electronics R4000/M3000/M-One/D-Two | +++
User avatar
iBM
Member
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:49 am
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby Limit54 » Sat Jun 07, 2014 10:30 pm

Use 32 bit and 48khz.

I've done tests with vsti's and recorded them at 96k and 48khz. At 96(my card won't go any higher) you get a nice shimmering high end that is not so present on the 48k but the thing is it's not really a big deal unless you are doing blu ray stuff. If you producing music that's inevitably going to be 44100 in the end then it won't make a difference. I recorded a track at 96 and then bounced it down to 441. Then I compared the two and I still lost the high end shimmer that the original 96k file had. If I remember correctly nothing really was lost on the low end. So all in all you can eq to get some more high end if you need it. Sometimes it can be to much and you need to shave it off the 96k stuff.

As for 32 bit,well you get way more headroom to play with and a bunch of other crap that I don't care about.
AMD Quad Core 4.2 4gigs of ram Windows 7 32bit
Cubase 7.5-----Adam A7x & Alesis M1 active mk2's
To much crap to mention but still not turning out great music
Limit54
Member
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 3:44 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby iBM » Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:37 pm

The human brain is easily fooled.

If you ever hear the difference between 96K vs 44.1K, it is due to bad filter design of your converters (Bad filtering artefacts is creeping down in the hearing range < 20 Khz).
The cheaper the converter/interface the more likely it will sound WORSE at 44.1K, NOT better at 96K (due to bad filtering.)
In better/very good converters human hearing will not hear or feel the difference.

It's impossible to hear anything over 20kHz.
The mechanics of the human hearing (auditory) system has no way to mechanically "convert" soundwaves into electric signals (sent through nerves to our brain for interpretation).
That is the the auditory hair cells job. They are located within the organ of Corti on a thin basilar membrane in the cochlea of the inner ear.
There are simply no hair-cells to capture anything over 20kHz (when newly born), ie no mechanical moving parts up for the task.
The frequencies above 20kHz can therefore NOT be converted to electric signals, and therefore will NOT reach our brain, because there is nothing for the nerves to send to our brain.

If you hear a difference between 44.1kHz and 96kHz, it's either bad converter filter design or imagination.

Somebody saying otherwise has NOT studied the Human Auditory System.

The human brain is easily fooled.
TSR - Now a division under The Tower Studio Suite - Run by my uncles nephew

Win7/Win8 x64 | Intel i5 2500/3570K | 16 GB RAM | MOTU PCIe-424 w/ 24io x 2 / 2408 / 308
Cubase 6.5/7.5 - Nuendo 5.5 | CC121 | Slate Digital | Softube | Sonnox | SoundToys |
Eventide | Exponential Audio | Boz' Digital Lab | +++
Dynaudio BM15A | Focusrite ISA430 | Universal Audio LA-610SE/2-610/8110 |
TLAudio 5052/C1/PA-1 | TC Electronics R4000/M3000/M-One/D-Two | +++
User avatar
iBM
Member
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:49 am
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby MrSoundman » Sun Jun 08, 2014 12:28 am

Just to put this in context: most gigging musicians I know have severely damaged hearing, and I suspect most of them can't hear a thing above 10-12kHz, certainly those who are now in their 40s and older, who've been gigging for years beside a drummer without wearing ear protection. This fact doesn't stop them from making great music that sounds fantastic. For example, I find that most great electric guitar sounds can endure a steep cut above 5kHz without any loss in perceptible quality (and with younger guitarists: with a noticeable improvement!).

Just saying .... if the music doesn't sound so good, perhaps the first place to start looking might not be in the area of Nyquist's theorem, sampling rate, or D/A converters.

Anyway, back on topic: I use 44.1kHz/24-bit as a default, or 48kHz/24-bit if I know it's going to video.
Cubase Pro 8 x64 | WaveLab 8.5.10 x64 | HALion 5.0.1 x64 | HSO 1.5 x64 | Midex 3/Midex 8 | Windows 7 x64
User avatar
MrSoundman
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1094
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:27 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 48 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby Cubasesx2to5 » Sun Jun 08, 2014 12:50 am

The main thing to consider here is that recording at higher bitrates and playback are two very different things. If you're recording a 100 piece orchestra you're better off to record it at the highest sample rate / bitrate as possible because summing up 100 channels of different data (the waves adding together to a stereo track) you get a higher resolution and more accurate rendering.

So when you render those 100 channels down to CD quality (44.1/16bit) you will have a more accurate reproduction.

Playing back at 192KHz/32bit is absolutely pointless and a waste of disk space but recording is important to capture as much data as possible.

The finished result will probably be an MP3 or CD anyway.
Cubasesx2to5
Junior Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:47 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby iBM » Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:20 am

Cubasesx2to5 wrote:The main thing to consider here is that recording at higher bitrates and playback are two very different things. If you're recording a 100 piece orchestra you're better off to record it at the highest sample rate / bitrate as possible because summing up 100 channels of different data (the waves adding together to a stereo track) you get a higher resolution and more accurate rendering.

So when you render those 100 channels down to CD quality (44.1/16bit) you will have a more accurate reproduction.


Not so at all when mixing and doing real time processing. All internal mixing/processing is done in the 32 bit floating point realm anyway (1500 dB headroom).
But........ When doing a lot of OFFLINE processing (mathimatically altering the source file), it is an advantage with 32 bit fp and 24 bit vs 16 bit.
If you just mix perfectly good source files without a lot of offline processing, 24/44.1 is more than good enough.

Take a look at this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ

And also the video in one of my previous post.
TSR - Now a division under The Tower Studio Suite - Run by my uncles nephew

Win7/Win8 x64 | Intel i5 2500/3570K | 16 GB RAM | MOTU PCIe-424 w/ 24io x 2 / 2408 / 308
Cubase 6.5/7.5 - Nuendo 5.5 | CC121 | Slate Digital | Softube | Sonnox | SoundToys |
Eventide | Exponential Audio | Boz' Digital Lab | +++
Dynaudio BM15A | Focusrite ISA430 | Universal Audio LA-610SE/2-610/8110 |
TLAudio 5052/C1/PA-1 | TC Electronics R4000/M3000/M-One/D-Two | +++
User avatar
iBM
Member
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:49 am
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby iBM » Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:30 am

MrSoundman wrote:Just saying .... if the music doesn't sound so good, perhaps the first place to start looking might not be in the area of Nyquist's theorem, sampling rate, or D/A converters.

Yes absolutely.

MrSoundman wrote:Anyway, back on topic: I use 44.1kHz/24-bit as a default, or 48kHz/24-bit if I know it's going to video.

Yes, more than adequate.

As a sidenote: Bon Jovi recorded their last record in 24/44.1. Why, when they can buy and use whatever equipment they want? Beacause their highly "educated" and trained engineers know that our ears don't need anything more (can't hear the difference).
And of corse. They have greatly recorded source files to work with.

So don't waste your time on technically non-issues ;)
TSR - Now a division under The Tower Studio Suite - Run by my uncles nephew

Win7/Win8 x64 | Intel i5 2500/3570K | 16 GB RAM | MOTU PCIe-424 w/ 24io x 2 / 2408 / 308
Cubase 6.5/7.5 - Nuendo 5.5 | CC121 | Slate Digital | Softube | Sonnox | SoundToys |
Eventide | Exponential Audio | Boz' Digital Lab | +++
Dynaudio BM15A | Focusrite ISA430 | Universal Audio LA-610SE/2-610/8110 |
TLAudio 5052/C1/PA-1 | TC Electronics R4000/M3000/M-One/D-Two | +++
User avatar
iBM
Member
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:49 am
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby Limit54 » Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:50 am

Yes 32 bit. Then smash those masters into a sausage.
AMD Quad Core 4.2 4gigs of ram Windows 7 32bit
Cubase 7.5-----Adam A7x & Alesis M1 active mk2's
To much crap to mention but still not turning out great music
Limit54
Member
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 3:44 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby toader » Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:20 am

I have experimented extensively with 44.1kHz, 48kHz, 96kHz, and even 192kHz. I have recorded and produced entire projects at all these sample rates. When it comes to the recording itself, I notice very little difference between the different sample rates... However:

I think some "processing" or FX do benefit from higher sample rates. This is more noticeable with some plugins than others. Also, some plugins automatically upsample to 192kHz for processing which poses a string of questions: 1) Do you think resampling is entirely without artifacts, distortion, etc? There are many sample rate converters that claim superior sample rate conversion. You can see some comparisons here: http://src.infinitewave.ca/
2) If resampling "does" affect audio in some way, doesn't it make sense that if plugins are upsampling and downsampling from 192kHz, that by running your project at 192kHz natively, you could avoid that extra sample rate conversion entirely in the processing? Is it possible this is a benefit? I think it's an interesting question at least.


In regard to higher sample rates... Do you think how "steep" the slope is on antialiasing filters in converters could potentially have audible effects? If so, the filter can be moved far above the audible range if working at 192kHz. At 44.1kHz, the filter must be VERY VERY VERY steep to avoid antialiasing. It's possible that could affect the sound.

Anyway, I think the most important thing is to just use your ears if you have the means to test it. Then you can decide for yourself without needing to ask. Learning how to trust your own ears is one of the most important things you can learn as an engineer. Getting an answer from someone on here and just doing what you're told is probably not the best solution. After many many experiments with this, I feel there is indeed a very small benefit to running at higher sample rates. The difference is small though. I believe you can produce completely professional sounding results even when working at 44.1kHz - there are FAR more important issues than the sample rate. Still, I do prefer working at higher sample rates myself just for that tiny added benefit.

Lastly, I know it's slightly off subject, but have you heard DSD? I have a Korg MR-1000 DSD recorder that I have compared directly with my converters (Apogee DA-16X). The Korg can operate at 5.6mHz. Yes, that is MEGAhertz, not kilohertz. How does it sound? UNBELIEVABLE. It's kind of shocking when you set up an A/B comparison between PCM audio and the Korg DSD. Many people act as if digital is perfect as it is and there is no point in anything besides 44.1 kHz 16-bit audio. For the public, that may be true - even mp3 seems ok for the consuming public. For audio engineers, if you can make something better, and you actually hear it as better, would you prefer to ignore it, or use it to your benefit?
Cubase 8.0.0, Wavelab 8.5.10, RME hdspe AES (x2), Matrox 9140 quad video (running 3 monitors), Dell T7500 workstation with Intel Xeon X5690 (6 core) 3.47gHz, 24GB RAM, UAD-2 Quad, Windows 7 64-bit
toader
Member
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 1:37 am
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby andyjh » Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:40 am

The Korg MR1000 is a one bit system, so 5.6MHz equates to stereo 24 bit at 192KHz - it's just another pointlessly high sampling rate for marketing purposes.

A normal 16 bit/44.1KHz CD runs at 1.411MHz (as data is read serially 1 bit at a time).


As has been mentioned - your ears are easily fooled by what your eyes expect to hear.
Master PC & Slave: Windows 7 64-bit / i7 / 24Gb RAM / Dual monitors / MOTU interfaces / Benchmark DAC
Networked via VE Pro
Equipment list: - more than I need
Plug in list:- definitely more than I need
andyjh
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 8:19 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby Limit54 » Sun Jun 08, 2014 3:49 am

So it's all pointless then?? If your going to mix down to 441 then just stick to it in the first place right?
AMD Quad Core 4.2 4gigs of ram Windows 7 32bit
Cubase 7.5-----Adam A7x & Alesis M1 active mk2's
To much crap to mention but still not turning out great music
Limit54
Member
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 3:44 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Where do you guys stand on Sample Rate (Khz)

Postby knuckle47 » Sun Jun 08, 2014 4:33 am

Spent 20 plus years in audiology and after testing thousands of people both normal and impaired, most drop off after 4k or 8k and even then most audiometers won't measure over 10k. Then, theres the difference between hearing level and sound pressure level and brings in things like equal loudness contour.
Cubase Pro 8 | Win 7 ultimate | MOTU 896HD | I7 4770K 32gb Corsair Dominator Ram |ASUS Maximus mobo
User avatar
knuckle47
Member
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:24 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Next

Return to Steinberg Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jeff Hayat and 3 guests