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
  #11  
Old 08-26-2018, 02:24 AM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 15,340
Default Re: 44.1 vs 48 khz... looking for a simple answer

Yea, optimum would have been 64k (there was even a brief try for 32k back inthe day but sheesh...) ... unfortunately that didn't happen and we need to suffer from this debate over and over again :)

if you cannot use 96k (due to filters and because some plugins process better) then 48k is a no-brainer.

SRC at final bounce.
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-26-2018, 11:14 PM
zedhed's Avatar
zedhed zedhed is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 3,894
Default Re: 44.1 vs 48 khz... looking for a simple answer

From Cliff @ Fractal Audio:

"I've long maintained that 64 kHz is the ideal sample rate for audio. But I can't get the industry to change."
"48 kHz is considered "pro" sampling rate. The reason for 44.1 kHz on CD's is subject to debate. Some maintain that the sample rate was lowered so that Beethoven's 9th would fit on a single CD. Others claim that it was because that rate was compatible with video equipment. IMO 44.1 kHz is insufficient for professional audio.

Personally I would prefer 64 kHz. Whilst Nyquist theorem is all well and good most people don't understand the details and simply state "the sample rate must be twice the highest desired frequency". The problem with this is as you approach Nyquist the filter demands become extreme. The more extreme the filter demands the more taps are needed, the more precision is needed, the more latency is incurred, etc. A 64 kHz sample rate would give you a nice, smooth roll-off from 20 kHz to 32 kHz rather than the brick wall you get with 44.1 kHz.

There is no hardware advantage to using 48 vs. 44.1. The costs would be the same in either case. Modern converters use over-sampling techniques to implement the necessary anti-aliasing filters thereby reducing off-chip filtering to simple circuits.
MP3s have no native sample rate but are typically 44.1 kHz because they are usually derived from CDs. MP3 is a psycho-acoustic compression format that exploits frequency masking to lower the data required to store audio information."

Quote:
Originally Posted by EGS View Post
Use 48 ---> go make music!!!
+1
__________________
Too much blood in my drugstream

Gigabyte X99 SOC Force Mobo Bios vF6d
Intel Core i7 5930k socket 2011 v3 @ 3.50GHz
32GB DDR4 Crucial RAM
System: Samsung M.2NVME SSD 960 Evo
Record: Samsung M.2NVME SSD 960 Evo
Samples: Samsung SATAlll SSD 840 Pro
Storage: 2x Samsung SATAlll SSD 840 Pro
EVGA GeForce GTX 750 Graphics
PT 11HD (v11.2.1) Omni s/pdif w Eleven Rack
HD 96I/O
Win 8.1 Pro
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-27-2018, 08:54 AM
Bob Olhsson Bob Olhsson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Songwriter Gulch, Nashville, TN
Posts: 3,255
Default Re: 44.1 vs 48 khz... looking for a simple answer

CD masters were originally made using videotape editing gear and the disk uses Philips' video disk technology that allows replication in a vinyl plant. Only Sony's marketing ever claimed any kind of "perfection" in 44.1k sample rate. Under the hood, it's video!

Arguments about "Nyquist" conveniently ignore the fact that he was assuming infinite slope filters having zero artifacts which exist only in mathematics and not the real world. Minimizing filter artifacts and aliasing within the audible range are the only reasons to use higher sample rates.

Gentle filters produce fewer artifacts however this is at the expense of higher sample rates in order to eliminate aliasing. It's all about the filters and nothing but the filters. Normal digital signal processing involves a great many filters that accumulate artifacts one wants to minimize.
__________________
Bob's room 615 562-4346
Georgetown Masters 615 254-3233
Interview
Artists are the gatekeepers of truth! - Paul Robeson
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-29-2018, 11:00 AM
tom_lowe tom_lowe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,004
Default Re: 44.1 vs 48 khz... looking for a simple answer

Quote:
Originally Posted by zedhed View Post
From Cliff @ Fractal Audio:
Some maintain that the sample rate was lowered so that Beethoven's 9th would fit on a single CD. Others claim that it was because that rate was compatible with video equipment. IMO 44.1 kHz is insufficient for professional audio.
Both are true, however the discs became 12cm instead of the original 10cm to fit Beethoven's 9th. The head of Sony was good friends with a conductor at the time, or so the story goes.

44.1 is divisible by the number of lines and frame-rate of the U-matic recorders which were modified for digital audio.
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
simple question..hopefully simple answer sethwudel Pro Tools 10 3 12-28-2012 07:49 PM
Simple Question, please someone give me a simple answer! lukaiow Pro Tools HDX & HD Native Systems (Mac) 1 04-19-2011 12:00 PM
Simple question about 8.0.3 that needs a simple answer FS1 Pro Tools M-Powered (Win) 0 12-23-2009 07:37 AM
Simple Question in need for Simple Answer The_Communist 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 3 01-24-2004 12:19 PM
simple question simple answer Salvedor Felix Troche 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 2 11-10-1999 09:41 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:52 AM.


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