|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
It's both, of course. Coarser is coarser and finer is finer. Finer = more accurate representation, more detail.
__________________
David J. Finnamore PT 2023.12 Ultimate | Clarett+ 8Pre | macOS 13.6.3 on a MacBook Pro M1 Max PT 2023.12 | Saffire Pro 40 | Win10 latest, HP Z440 64GB |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Quote:
Your music between 20 and 20k will sound the same if you use any sampling rate above 40k. Of course we have to take into account the low pass filter to avoid aliasing and that is why the sampling rate is above 40k: to have a more gentle roll off to avoid ringing. Some may feel that moving the filter higher in frequency, like with 88.2 or 96, will reduce ringing. It can if the filter is properly designed. Also, since there is so little musical energy above 20k, there is little there to cause ringing (straight muted trumpets accepted).
__________________
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. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
You're right that less corner ring could influence the perception of clarity, but there's also less phase shift and ripple to consider. Any or all could contribute to verbs sounding better in higher rate sessions.
Quote:
If Nyquist had explained all we needed to hear, many good plug-ins wouldn't upsample prior to processing. The Theorem may be all you need to know to get sound into and out of the digital domain. But if you do anything to it while it's there, you start to reveal its shortcomings. Or rather, you start to reveal the incredible sensitivity of the human ear. The following is just thinking out loud. I've never tried programming a reverb, so I don't really know for sure how they work. But when you pass digital audio words to a piece of software, it doesn't necessarily "hear" them the way the human ear hears them after reconstruction. It operates on the bit stream with an algorithm. From the perspective of an algorithm, I imagine that an 11 kHz tone drawn with 8 words per cycle is going to be more accurately represented than one drawn with 4 words per cycle. That sort of thing, intuitively, seems like it should result in a smoother sounding reverb. No?
__________________
David J. Finnamore PT 2023.12 Ultimate | Clarett+ 8Pre | macOS 13.6.3 on a MacBook Pro M1 Max PT 2023.12 | Saffire Pro 40 | Win10 latest, HP Z440 64GB |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Quote:
What effects the sound of the conversion is not the actual conversion to the new sample rate, it is the reconstruction filter at the Nyquist frequency. But this holds true for any sampling, not just sample rate conversion. The crappier the filter is, the worse it will sound.
__________________
Derek Jones Sound Engineer / Producer / Composer Derek Jones Linkedin Megatrax Recording Studios Megatrax Studios Yelp Page A-list Music Artist Page |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
No. The reconstruction filter will recreate the same output as long as the sound is less than half Nyquist. The sound will be the same. A higher sampling rate, by itself, will have no effect.
__________________
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. |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Quote:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-thin...important.html Sampling rate conversion is simplified if rates are integer multiples of each other. Here are some interesting charts comparing SRC with different manufacturers: http://src.infinitewave.ca/
__________________
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. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Quote:
Go ahead and try your sample dropping approach and let us know how it sounds. Today those factors are irrelevant in the better algos. |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
Quote:
ABSOLUTELY NO PROGRAM EVER DIVIDES BY 2 TO DOWNSAMPLE. NONE. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. IT IS A MYTH. This is exactly the reason why I posted about this. There are so many people that still don't understand how this actually works or have been told incorrectly and then adhere to the wrong information as though it is fact. Do this little math problem for me please. 44100 x 160 = ? 48000 x 147 = ? What are the answers to the equations above? Noticing anything similar about the answers? What do you think that means in terms of sample rate conversion?
__________________
Derek Jones Sound Engineer / Producer / Composer Derek Jones Linkedin Megatrax Recording Studios Megatrax Studios Yelp Page A-list Music Artist Page |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
and by the way, that DVinfo forum link is sooooo far off the mark it's scary. They guy is telling people to add DITHER when sample rate converting!?!?!?! Wow... that is scary. These guys in that link are all novice/hobbyist people. Don't put too much stock into what they are saying, because after reading through the thread pretty much all of the info they mentioned was wrong (except for the fact that DVDs use 48KHz and CDs use 44.1KHz).
__________________
Derek Jones Sound Engineer / Producer / Composer Derek Jones Linkedin Megatrax Recording Studios Megatrax Studios Yelp Page A-list Music Artist Page |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?
OK, so you send a digital audio stream (from a track, via an aux bus) to a reverb plug-in. The plug-in operates on that stream with an algorithm and outputs the result. Where in that scenario are reconstruction filters used? How is it that the algorithm would produce the same result given different data to process?
__________________
David J. Finnamore PT 2023.12 Ultimate | Clarett+ 8Pre | macOS 13.6.3 on a MacBook Pro M1 Max PT 2023.12 | Saffire Pro 40 | Win10 latest, HP Z440 64GB |
|
|
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 |