Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Additional Resources


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Pro Tools Software > Tips & Tricks

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #101  
Old 03-21-2013, 10:38 PM
WombatStudio.Org's Avatar
WombatStudio.Org WombatStudio.Org is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 517
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
There's no advantage in recording to 32 float files over 24 bit. There is an advantage to 32 float when calculating files with DSP such as Audiosuite or bouncing. The session setup window allows you to change it back and forth during a project.
Disagree.

32 bit float essentially gives you unlimited headroom.

Try this as demonstrated in a video by Russ over at pro-tools-expert.com (you have to have an account to view the video):

Set a clip's clip gain to clipping, so it's clipping the LEDs.

Bounce it out at 32 bit float. Bounce it again at 24 bit.

Suck those files into a session and AudioSuite Normalize them to 0db.

What result?
__________________
WombatStudio.Org • Digital Recording, Mixing and Mastering in Philadelphia, PA • USA
"It's not the gear ... it's the ear"
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 03-22-2013, 02:04 AM
Top Jimmy's Avatar
Top Jimmy Top Jimmy is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 4,612
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by WombatStudio.Org View Post
Disagree.

32 bit float essentially gives you unlimited headroom.
Nope. 32-bit float does not give you unlimited headroom, it only gives you the ability to float the 24-bits used in the word above and below scale. There's still only 144 dB of SNR per sample.

And as Bob so knowledgeably stated, there is no advantage in recording 32-bit float files because there is no AD converter whatsoever that spits out 32-bit float words. All converters put out fixed point words with the best resolution being 24-bit.
__________________
James Cadwallader

Hackintosh - Gigabyte Z77X-UP5TH, Intel Core i7-3770K, 32GB 1600Mhz DDR3, 2x SATA 6Gb/s 240GB SSD, 3x SATA 6Gb/s 1TB HDD, 1x Glyph 2TB USB3 HDD, Sierra 10.12.2.

Pro Tools HD 12.8.1, Mbox3, MOTU PCI-424 w/ 2408mkII & 1224 (Mac)
Pro Tools 11.3.2, Mbox2, Focusrite Scarlett 18I8 (Win 7)

Presonus Faderport, Pro Tools | Control
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 03-22-2013, 06:41 AM
groundcontrol's Avatar
groundcontrol groundcontrol is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 961
Default 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Which is why they are called 32 bit bloat in that context...
__________________
Can you please send yourself over fiber to go spam some other forum?

Darryl Ramm
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 03-22-2013, 02:29 PM
daeron80 daeron80 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Orlando, Florida, USA
Posts: 3,499
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by WombatStudio.Org View Post
Try this as demonstrated in a video by Russ over at pro-tools-expert.com
It's been a while since I watched that video. But, if I remember right, it actually demonstrates what Bob said. The video shows doing things with clip gain, right? Which is operating on audio that has already been recorded. In that sense, it's like Audio Suite. What the video doesn't show is recording an analog signal too hot and saving it with 32-float headroom. That's not a physical possibility.
__________________
David J. Finnamore

Can we debunk the "less bits" myth now?

PT 12.8.1 HD | Omni | macOS Sierra
PT 12.8.2 | Saffire Pro 40 | Win7x64
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 03-22-2013, 03:06 PM
TOM@METRO's Avatar
TOM@METRO TOM@METRO is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 16,255
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisdee View Post
I'v not been able to hear any difference between 44, 48, 88 or 96 KHz, but I'm only on an mbox 2 pro.
Maby better AD/DA converters would make it more audible ?
This has been backed up again and again in consumer blind tests. Let's think about the quality of converters in an ipod. However there are plug-ins that will sound somewhat better at higher sample rates. Whether or not this is enough to justify the additional resource needed is still hotly debated. I typically run 48/24. I feel if people can live with MP3s, they can live with the downside of the conversion to 44.1. Albee's point though still holds true. If you know that the project will never see film, 44.1 is fine.
__________________
~ tom thomas

Formerly hobotom

Pro Tools 12~HDX~HDN
Studio One 3.3~DP9
HD Omni~192 I/O
MOTU 24 I/O
Windows 10
Intel Hexcore i7, SSD
Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3
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.

www.metrostudios.com
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 03-22-2013, 04:00 PM
groundcontrol's Avatar
groundcontrol groundcontrol is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 961
Default 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TOM@METRO View Post
This has been backed up again and again in consumer blind tests. Let's think about the quality of converters in an ipod. However there are plug-ins that will sound somewhat better at higher sample rates. Whether or not this is enough to justify the additional resource needed is still hotly debated. I typically run 48/24. I feel if people can live with MP3s, they can live with the downside of the conversion to 44.1. Albee's point though still holds true. If you know that the project will never see film, 44.1 is fine.
It's the badly implemented converters that show a marked difference in performance. Switching sample rate on the Lavry and Benchmark is telling in that regard.

Regarding the plugins and high sample rates, in my limited testing I've found it seemed to be the ones with oversampling that apparently benefited from higher sr. It may have to do with not having to up/downsample and/or having different/relaxed decimation filter values at higher rates.
__________________
Can you please send yourself over fiber to go spam some other forum?

Darryl Ramm
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 03-22-2013, 06:38 PM
Bob Olhsson Bob Olhsson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Songwriter Gulch, Nashville, TN
Posts: 3,139
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TOM@METRO View Post
...If you know that the project will never see film, 44.1 is fine.
The problem is that we don't know and the highest quality playback our projects are likely to encounter in the future are film and video.
__________________
Bob's room 615 562-4346
Georgetown Masters 615 254-3233
Interview
Artists are the gatekeepers of truth! - Paul Robeson
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 03-22-2013, 09:51 PM
groundcontrol's Avatar
groundcontrol groundcontrol is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 961
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

And since most music mixes will generally do a trip outside the box to the analog world during mastering, the opportunity to simply capture it all back at 44 is always there.
__________________
Can you please send yourself over fiber to go spam some other forum?

Darryl Ramm
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 03-22-2013, 10:43 PM
TOM@METRO's Avatar
TOM@METRO TOM@METRO is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 16,255
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
The problem is that we don't know and the highest quality playback our projects are likely to encounter in the future are film and video.
Exactly the way I feel, this is why I record at 48/24.
__________________
~ tom thomas

Formerly hobotom

Pro Tools 12~HDX~HDN
Studio One 3.3~DP9
HD Omni~192 I/O
MOTU 24 I/O
Windows 10
Intel Hexcore i7, SSD
Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3
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.

www.metrostudios.com
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 03-25-2013, 01:29 PM
gives's Avatar
gives gives is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,100
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisdee View Post
After some further testing I have to correct my self. There is actually a pretty big difference between 44 and 96 KHz. Especially on the rtas effects (reverb, delay, etc) . They sound clearer and better in my opinion.

It also seem to be less of the pitchbend/chorus effect on DVerb at 96HKz.

On a dry track without any effects I can't hear the difference that much.
THis is true.. It's also hard to evaluate on a lower quality Interface with less quality A/D converters and so I am guessing that is why Avid has better ones as well. I DO hear a BIG difference here especially with all of the work that gets done here for films and other projects. Much cleaner and more transparent. It's all about what you are starting with, like cassette VS 2" tape at 30 ips. RIght.? -:)

Regards,

G
__________________
Gregory Ives, Composer/Sound Designer/Musician
http://www.gregives.com
http://pro.imdb.com/name/nm1170521/
NonProIMDB: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1170521/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

Protools 12.8.2 HD Native Thunderbolt Avid HD IO
Mac Pro 3.5GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon E5 64GB of Ram
OSX Sierra 10.12.6
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
going higher than 10.6.3 viaspiaggia Post - Surround - Video 2 06-23-2011 04:41 AM
Can I get mp3.dll from 6.7 or higher? jonah day 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 0 03-13-2006 02:54 PM
Anyone running higher than OS 10.3.4 with 001? duderonomi 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 2 04-15-2005 07:59 PM
Anyone use JAM v.2.6 with OS 9.1 or higher?? peter parker 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 3 11-21-2002 10:38 AM
Higher Gain Tommyboy 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 1 03-22-2000 07:48 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:57 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com