|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
I swear I can hear a difference in signal quality at 96K. But that could definitely
be my imagination knowing that it's a higher (better) sample rate. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
What are you using, Mbox2Pro, 003 ?
Do you external AD/DA ? |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Use 44.1 for CD and 48 for video. You will get no advantage doing it another way and you will create distortion with SRC the 48 to 44.1
__________________
Park The Transfer Lab at Video Park Analog tape to Pro Tools transfers, 1/4"-2" http://www.videopark.com MacPro 6 core 3.33 GHz, OS 10.12.1, 8 GB RAM, PT12.6.1, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, PreSonus DigiMax, MC Control V3.5, dual displays, Neumann U-47, Tab V76 mic pre, RCA 44BX and 77DX, MacBook Pro 9,1, 2.3 Mhz, i7, CBS Labs Audimax and Volumax. Ampex 440B half-track and four-track, 351 tube full-track mono, MM-1100 16-track. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Quote:
Except the buttons were reversed. The 96 was really the 44.1.
__________________
Park The Transfer Lab at Video Park Analog tape to Pro Tools transfers, 1/4"-2" http://www.videopark.com MacPro 6 core 3.33 GHz, OS 10.12.1, 8 GB RAM, PT12.6.1, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, PreSonus DigiMax, MC Control V3.5, dual displays, Neumann U-47, Tab V76 mic pre, RCA 44BX and 77DX, MacBook Pro 9,1, 2.3 Mhz, i7, CBS Labs Audimax and Volumax. Ampex 440B half-track and four-track, 351 tube full-track mono, MM-1100 16-track. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Like I said, it's probably a perception of higher means better, forcing you to listen for that "better" sound. In a blind test where the subject doesn't know they are comparing it they would probably not hear it.
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Most everyone will hear the improvement of 96K, especially if they compare with 44.1K in an A-B comparison while recording. But once the audio ends up going thru mixing, mastering and reduction DOWN to 48K for a DVD, 44.1K for a CD(or to mp3....UGH) the improvement has been lost(anywhere from a little to a lot).
__________________
HP Z4 workstation, Mbox Studio https://www.facebook.com/search/top/...0sound%20works The better I drink, the more I mix BTW, my name is Dave, but most people call me.........................Dave |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Quote:
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Quote:
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. |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
I was able to record a 30kHz signal to PT LE 002 at 96k. So the higher sampling rate does record signals greater than 20k. Unfortunately, my speakers can't reproduce that and I could not hear that sound even if they could.
I don't believe that higher frequencies make lower frequencies any better or more precise. Smoother reverb tails have to do with bit depth, not sampling rate. With digital migration of a analog tape to CD, I record to PT at 44.1. I see no benefit recording at 96 and then SCR to 44.1,
__________________
Park The Transfer Lab at Video Park Analog tape to Pro Tools transfers, 1/4"-2" http://www.videopark.com MacPro 6 core 3.33 GHz, OS 10.12.1, 8 GB RAM, PT12.6.1, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, PreSonus DigiMax, MC Control V3.5, dual displays, Neumann U-47, Tab V76 mic pre, RCA 44BX and 77DX, MacBook Pro 9,1, 2.3 Mhz, i7, CBS Labs Audimax and Volumax. Ampex 440B half-track and four-track, 351 tube full-track mono, MM-1100 16-track. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Is this correct ? I can defenetly hear a big difference especially on reverb between 44 and 96KHz at the same bit bandwidth (24bit).
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 01:54 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 09:38 AM |
Higher Gain | Tommyboy | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 1 | 03-22-2000 06:48 AM |