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  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #111  
Old 06-20-2003, 06:05 PM
Park Seward's Avatar
Park Seward Park Seward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 4,284
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

I saved this from the DUC:

Jayman#9
Member
Member # 27771
posted September 03, 2002 02:34 AM *** ** * * * * **
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's all in your head. I've tricked people by recording a vocal at 96khz, copy it and converting it to 44.1khz, then comparing the original (96khz) signal with the 44.1khz signal. I would create 2 sessions in Nuendo. The first session would be named 96khz, but it would have the 44.1khz vocal. The second session called 44.1khz would have a 96khz vocal. I wanted to see if people really could tell. Now the thing is, is that there is a slight difference in sound, but it doesn't mean that the 96khz vocal is better. After the test 9 times out of ten, people would say, "oh yeah, the 96khz vocal has way more depth. It's a cleaner signal." But really they were going off about the 44.1 signal
It's pretty funny. Most people get pissed off and defensive when I tell them the truth, and others laugh. I know this trick because someone did it to me. Try it, I'm sure you'll have the same results (that's if you have a 96khz recording program).

Now, what is the frequency response of any Digi hardware at 96 or 192?
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 06-20-2003, 06:11 PM
Carl Z Carl Z is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 656
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

I agree about the filter part - in fact I'm the first guy in this thread to mention it. But take the 192 I/o - Different filters for different sample rates?
__________________
"I'm one of the few people I know who knows the few people I know" - CL
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 06-20-2003, 06:41 PM
Chaasm71 Chaasm71 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 68
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Tell ya what, guys. Why doesn't somebody (with the capability) make up an audio file at 96kHz (what the content is will probably start another massive thread like this one!). I'd do it, but I only have a little old 001, so I'm a techno-peasant! Anyhow, take that file, make a copy and downsample it to 48kHz (i.e., take out every other sample). Give each file a generic name, like File A and File B and post a link to them. Then, people with appropriate technology can listen to it and compare the two in a blind experiment. Everyone can post here which one they liked more. At the end, we count 'em up and see if the answer is significantly different from 50%. If not, then it's in your head. If so, then I'll get my slide rule out and do some thinking! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Charlie.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 06-20-2003, 07:12 PM
clorox clorox is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 393
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Time to bust out the good ole' ASCII. heh heh.

The following is just one example of how wave math done at 48kHz could have different results through truncation than 96kHz. It is the simplest example I could think of on a very,very brief wave, but I don't have time to sit up all night and do ascii drawings. This extrapolates out as complicated as you want to make it.

They are both 24bit digital representatives of the same wave (a very brief one with two sharp peaks), but the first one gets four samples; the second one only gets two samples to represent the same wave. We run both signals through the same (very) simple amplifier (x2) and process them at their native sample rate. Then we reduce the first wave back down to the sample rate of the second wave so they both output the same format sample rate. They produce different waves at the end! The first wave has four more '*', but depending on whether we round up or down on the second wave to compensate for the lack precision, it could have been four less.

[img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

------------*-------------20
------------*-------------19
------------*-------------18
------------*-------------17
------------*-*-----------16
------------*-*-----------15
------------*-*-----------14
------------*-*---**------13
------------*-*---**------12
------------*-*---****----11
-*----------*-*---****----10
-*----------*-*---****----9
-*-*--------*-*---****----8
-*-*--------*-*---****----7
-*-*-------****---****----6
-*-*-------****---****----5
-*-*-------****---****----4
****-------****---****----3
****-------****---****----2
****-------****---****----1

4 sample wave * 2 and then reduced to 2 samples= 48 area

=================================================

----------------------13
-----------**---------12
-----------**---------11
-----------****-------10
-----------****-------9
-----------****-------8
-----------****-------7
**---------****-------6
****-------****-------5
****-------****-------4
****-------****-------3
****-------****-------2
****-------****-------1

2 sample wave * 2 = 44 area

=================================================
__________________
http://www.the-outside.com
various Macs and PC's
002r and Mbox
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 06-20-2003, 09:37 PM
Dalecoz Dalecoz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 613
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Ok, this has been the most interesting of all topics that I have seen on the DUC but I was wondering if the title could be changedd?
There isn't much going on about the 001 being discontinued anymore
__________________
Mbox
PT 6.4 on OS 10.3.5
iBook G3 700mhz 640 MB
120 gig Maxtor 7200 2 MB Firwire
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 06-21-2003, 12:32 AM
Park Seward's Avatar
Park Seward Park Seward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 4,284
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Quote:
Originally posted by Chaasm71:
Give each file a generic name, like File A and File B and post a link to them. Then, people with appropriate technology can listen to it and compare the two in a blind experiment. At the end, we count 'em up and see if the answer is significantly different from 50%.

Charlie.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Perhaps not good enough. This test wil have too much error and we would not know how much better the "good" sample might be. We need...

Double Stimulus Continuous Quality Scale (DSCQS) Method Instructions

Dear subjects,
Thank you for participating in this test. In the DSCQS tests, a series of two pairs of sequences will be played on the monitor.

Your task is to evaluate the QUALITY of BOTH test sequences in each pair. You do that by
marking one point on each of the following rating scales:

***********************A **** B
Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Bad

The rating scale on the left is for grading the first sequence (A), the rating scale on the right is for grading the second sequence (B). Please use an horizontal mark (no crosses or other signs that could make your vote ambiguous). Each evaluation must reflect your opinion of the global quality of the whole sequence. Therefore, only vote after the end of the second sequence and base your evaluation on the entire duration of each sequence. Do not hesitate to rate a sequence either at the top or bottom of the scale, if that is how you believe it should be rated. A voting form will be distributed before each test session. On this form will be a series of rating scales, like the ones above, one scale pair for each sequence. The scale pairs are numbered sequentially. Use scale pair 1 for the first sequence pair, scale pair 2 for the second sequence pair and so on.
The first sequence you will be see will be announced by the message “A” (standing for 2 seconds) then the second sequence you will be see will be announced by the message “B” (standing for 2 seconds) Then the two sequences will be shown again and the messages will change into “A*” and “B*”. Finally you will see the message “VOTE N”. Look at the scoring sheet and check for the correct number. Then mark the box corresponding to the quality level you have chosen.
During these tests do not talk with other assessors or comment on the sequences you have seen. Before recording your vote, always check to be sure you are using the correct scale on the score sheet. Finally, it is important that you keep your concentration throughout the test session. Now try this evaluation procedure in a practice session. You will see a series of pairs of sequences using the exact same timing as will be used during an actual test session. This will allow you to become familiar with the timing of the test and to practice using the rating scales.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 06-21-2003, 12:41 AM
Chaasm71 Chaasm71 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 68
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Park! You are totally cracking me up! Besides, my 'test' idea is totally flawed because the 96kHz file would be twice as big, so everyone would know! Oh well... I agree to disagree with those who hold that 96kHz sounds better. I've certainly never claimed to have 'golden' ears! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Clorox, I don't quite follow your picture. E-mail me a better pic (do one in your favorite paint program): my e-mail address is chaasm71@hotmail.com.

Cheers!

Charlie.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 06-21-2003, 06:35 AM
B-Grade B-Grade is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 133
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Well, when I say Nyquist bastardized I mean it for several things. His analog to digital theories were based on morse code, not digital PCM audio. Many math experts rail the oversimplification of his theorms applied, nay shoehorned, into the graphic and audio world.

Another wrinkle:

Read an interview with Rupert Neve. He says he makes his consoles that can deal with 140+ db and 40-50K frequencies. He says this all affects the audio, weather you can hear those frequecies or not, they do affect the frequencies we can hear.
__________________
Mac 5,1 12-core Mojave
PT 2020.9.1
HDX - MTRX Studio
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 06-21-2003, 07:54 AM
masmit masmit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 82
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Duardo, I'm not disagreeing with you. And whilst I agrre that better filtering schemes seem to be the most likely explanation of why some people prefer high sample rates, I'm just pointing out that higher sample rates also give you, at least theoretically, one or two more octaves of HF.

Personally, even if they actually do in practice, my listening has convinced me that I don't need these extra ocatves. But that's just me, some considerable people, including good old Rupert, seem to be claiming that it is possible to perceive these vey high frequencies, and I don't believe there is yet any irrefutable proof one way or the other.

I'm at 44.1 all the way, and as with any recording medium, if it spits my audio back out without having done anything to it that I dislike, I'm happy. About the best thing I know of to say about recording equipment is that it doesn't seem to get in the way...

Cheers, Mark
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 06-21-2003, 08:07 AM
froyo froyo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 2,863
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

By B-Grade
Quote:
He says this all affects the audio, whether you can hear those frequecies or not, they do affect the frequencies we can hear.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Huh!?!. So what you are saying is that even though we can not hear it, we can hear it. How does that work? I understand what is being said, it was just worded funny. That is a theory that has many implications and that I believe should be studied scientifically. Do humans top out at 20Khz? Do some hear above that? And even if we top out at 20Khz, do ultrasound frequencies (Hz) affect audible ones, and if so in what way?

Also, around page two I suggested the blind test. Usually for blind tests to be true and fair, they also seem to go hand in hand with common sense and simplicity. Have someone else record sounds at 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96 and 192. You are not present during this phase at all. After recording is done you come in. Listen. Decide. Obviously use the exact same gear for all rates. In this case you come in off the street, sit down, close your eyes and listen. Decide. Done.

Do this as many times as you need or is possible, with different material recorded, different gear, different rooms, etc. If higher sampling rates give you better results, for whatever reason (better converters, filters, etc.), then use them. If not then don't. Simple as that.
__________________
froyo
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
003 Discontinued? bootc Pro Tools 10 58 12-05-2011 07:15 PM
Is 003 really discontinued? ripekeai Pro Tools 9 15 03-29-2011 07:05 PM
Digi 003 Rack Discontinued? Tritono9 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 12 06-04-2010 07:39 PM
Digi 001 discontinued? Dino Bonanno 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 1 01-13-2004 08:22 PM
001 being discontinued??? fabpab 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 5 11-10-2002 05:18 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:58 AM.


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