|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The burning question!
Greg Malcangi
Member Member # 6931 posted January 17, 2002 08:50 AM *** **** ** "Hi Nika, Let's take these examples: 1. Record 24 tracks of audio @ 44.1k, mix and master at 44.1k. 2. Record 24 tracks of audio @ 88.2k, mix @ 88.2k, master down to 44.1k. At a guess I would say that example 2 is going to produce the better quality. Here is my reasoning: When you track @ 44.1k the brickwall filters are applied to every track on the way in. During the mix therefore, you are effectively summing together 24 channels of the filter artifacts. Tracking and mixing 24 channels at 88.2k, the filter artifacts are negligable in comparison with 44.1k. You then apply the 44.1k brickwall filter to the final mix. Question: As you are only applying the 44.1k filter once, at the final output stage in example 2, is this going to be theoretically better than applying it to every channel as in example 1?" Greg ______________________ Awsome and right 'on target' [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] I would like the questioned answered and then to ask it again by adding the following to example 1 - Apogee SE conversion on a Mix + rig. And the following to example 2 - Digidesign 192 interface operating at 96K on a PTHD rig. [img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img] I wonder if the worlds classical music community will express a new interest in Digidesign now. I can report that my classical music clients ARE interested me providing them 96k and WILL be keeping a keen eye on developments..! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The burning question!
Very HOT [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img] question!
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The burning question!
AMENdelson!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The burning question!
The only reason I would use a higher sample rate than 44.1 are these 2.
1. If I had the most highend sample rate converter there is, or 2. If I had an analog system, but digital medium (SSL to Pro TOols back to SSL to DAT) *I think a lot of people who want to stay digital want minimal hardware, better stuff for cheaper, etc. When they realize that they have to spend thousands on a little box to accurately convert their 88.2 mix (I don't think any software is worthy) I think they (as would I) would much rather stick to 44.1. The ONLY ISSUE I myself have with recording at other than 44.1 is the fact that cheap or software sample rate converters can degrade the sound a lot, more so than if you started with 44.1 in the first place. To me it's almost like tracking on an SSL and Studer but mixing down to a cassete deck in a 100 dollar boombox via the 1/8 inch mic input!! I guess lots of people only have what they have, and try to make it sound best. When there is not an option to have an apogee converter sticking to 44.1 sounds best.
__________________
Mike Blanchard Engineer |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The burning question!
Hmmmm.......
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Burning Question? | shanabit | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 5 | 05-16-2005 09:47 AM |
CD-Burning Question | Matt Whritenour | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 11 | 08-07-2003 06:35 PM |
CD burning question | bounce88 | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 2 | 07-16-2003 08:37 PM |
Burning question | mik | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 5 | 02-24-2002 07:02 PM |
burning cd Question | jmarso | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 0 | 02-26-2001 10:10 AM |