|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
A new Digidesign 888.........High fidelity
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
There are many articles by Nika Aldrich, Paul Frindle and Dan Lavry that say that an ideal SR would be something around 60kHz (that does not exist) because beyond this frequency the bass band loses definition. Going over 96KHz is marketing.
__________________
Avid HDX - Avid HD I/O 16x16 Analog - Pro Tools Ultimate 2023.6 - Nuendo 11 Mac Pro 5.1 2 esacore 2.66 64GB Ram - Mac OS 11.7.7 |
#33
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
44.1 and 48k have paid the bills here for years. In all these years I only recall twice that someone asked for a higher sample rate. And one of them had me convert a 44.1 session to 96 and he said he could hear a huge improvement. What a fun business.
This post is in no way meant as a sample rate suggestion. We should all choose what makes us happy.
__________________
~ tom thomas Formerly hobotom Pro Tools Ultimate 2024 HDX Hybrid HD Omni and 192 I/Os Windows 10 Intel Hexcore i7 All Samsung Pro SSDs Ampex MM1200 2" 24 trk tape Outboard: UREI, Eventide, Lexicon, Yamaha, TC Electronics, Orban, ART, EchoAudio, Dolby, Hughes, API, Neve, Audio Arts, BBE, Aphex, Berringer, MOTU, dbx, Allison, etc. Plug-ins: Too many to talk about. www.metrostudios.com |
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
Perhaps the point is we already have too many to choose from and the foolish mind always becomes happy with bigger numbers. If audio industry isn't doubling the numbers then companies are greed to sell ageing boxes and hold on to better quality. Cannot win this with being happy.
Early digital gear were clocking 32k and doubling that to 64k would have been perfect. Damn CD gave us 44.1k otherwise our dilemma might be 32 / 48 / 64 what to choose? With that said I'm fine with 48k (tracking) but some plugins do operate better at 96k so that's what I use for mixing
__________________
Janne What we do in life, echoes in eternity. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
Quote:
__________________
Avid HDX - Avid HD I/O 16x16 Analog - Pro Tools Ultimate 2023.6 - Nuendo 11 Mac Pro 5.1 2 esacore 2.66 64GB Ram - Mac OS 11.7.7 |
#36
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
IN THEORY, digital domain and higher sampling rates ONLY mean processing of higher frequencies are possible. (EDIT: just the same, digital domain and higher bit rates ONLY mean higher dynamic range, but that is not necessary as 24bit can handle 144B and best converters can only do 124dB which still gives us a nice 20dB headroom to record below digital full scale)
IN REALITY, if you ADDA caps at 20k that is taken away from you. The only advantage of higher sample rate session lies in whether the plugin you use works better in 96k compared to 48k. If you only store/process frequencies below 20kHz, there is ZERO advantage in recording at zillion megahertz sampling rate EDIT: assuming you have perfect converters. the analog filters that cap to 20k make the more imperfections the less perfect converters you use. this is why people can hear a difference between 48k and 96k in blind tests. if we had 64k sampling rate available, nobody with human hearing could make a difference between 64k and 96k
__________________
Janne What we do in life, echoes in eternity. |
#37
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
Quote:
And because reconstruction takes all data into account, it also takes those bogus samples as well, which means if you only need 48k samples for a perfect reconstruction (assuming perfect converters) then sampling at 96k doubles the chances of sampling error, sampling at 192k quadruples it, etc. So if we only hear and process frequences below 20k (which by Nyquist we only need 40kHz sampling rate) it is not a good idea to sample at 768kHz because the chance of a bogus sample is 16X compared to sampling at 48k (filtering out one bogus sample is not possible because any algorithm cannot determine what kind of music we are recording and processing) The practical implication of this is: you get better results with close to perfect 48k converters than less than perfect 768k converters
__________________
Janne What we do in life, echoes in eternity. |
#38
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
When in XXX higher YYY is probably better kind of thinking has got us to this situation.
What people should understand is we need 40kHz sampling rate and perfect converters -- and because we don't have perfect converters, the imperfections of analog filterers before less than perfect conversion need to be compensated with higher sampling that puts those imperfections outside of human hearing range. That however is proved to be somewhere near 60kHz sampling, and 96k is good enough for even mediocre converters such as DigiDesign 002 from +15 years ago.
__________________
Janne What we do in life, echoes in eternity. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
Quote:
__________________
Avid HDX - Avid HD I/O 16x16 Analog - Pro Tools Ultimate 2023.6 - Nuendo 11 Mac Pro 5.1 2 esacore 2.66 64GB Ram - Mac OS 11.7.7 |
#40
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Avid: new HW?? HDX 8 years old!!!
Quote:
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WHY did I not do this 10 years ago?! | midnightrambler | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 6 | 08-19-2010 07:23 AM |
What now , after all these years ...??? | gweber | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 23 | 05-31-2007 10:56 AM |
OT - How was your New Years gig? | bigd | General Discussion | 7 | 01-05-2005 01:57 AM |
OT - 60 Years After D-Day | The Weed | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 4 | 06-07-2004 01:49 PM |
24/96 Two Years away? | Mark Jiaras | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 21 | 12-05-2000 04:14 PM |