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 > Legacy Products > Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 01-20-2002, 10:26 PM
ejsongs ejsongs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: los angeles
Posts: 408
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

to lee and everyone else who has posted this thread:

My reasons for asking about the audible diffence in sample rates are as follows:

1. To me all digi did was give us the same system we already have but at 96K. They did not change the summing mixer so that means to me that the HD system running at 48K with their new interface is not going sound any better that the existing system with a good clock and great converters.

2. Per the digi reps at namm running the HD system @ 96K requires so much power that you end up with only 64 tracks and same amount of dsp power card for card as the Mix system @48K.

3. One rep said that they changed the dithering mixer but I have no idea what that means or how that will translate.

4. I do r&b & pop so I could care less about 24track @ 192 K.

So the question is, do I upgrade & spend $10,000 and go through the headaches of bug fixes over the ability to record frequencies and overtones that only mice can hear or continue to make records on something that I know gets good results and works. I've got apogee converters and unless this new system blows the mix system away. I see no point to upgrade [unless the 96K or 88.2K (which makes more sense because it is a 2:1 ratio when going down to 44.1) becomes the industry standard].

special note to Lee: I often enjoy reading your post but for the record I've been accused of having exceptional ears by many engineers. The notion of buying the HD system or recording @ 96K just so the 5 people in the world who can hear the difference between 96K and 48K will be happy seems a bit ridiculous to me. If there is a significant difference or it becomes the industry standard then I'll have no choice but to switch. If not, then digi can kiss my !@#$#@
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-05-2018, 02:54 AM
alexandrepigeot alexandrepigeot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Mauritius
Posts: 2
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ejsongs View Post
Has anyone heard recordings done at these sampling rates? Is there a noticable difference? I'd love to know what you guys think before I consider doing the upgrade.
Sorry to revive an old thread. I was browsing around for some 192k info and while reading this thread I realised that no one posted the correct answer to the question. With newbies in mind, please allow me:

There is, effectively, no aural difference between 48KHz and everything up in most common listening conditions. The real reason why should be striving for higher frequencies is oversampling. That said, it is a fact that the sound will be more rich and precise in extreme conditions (think movie theatre or expensive home cinemas).

If you grab a 48k track and try some time stretching for example, you will end up with artefacts with ratios as small as 105% (or 95% in the other direction). You can effectively MULTIPLY the safety range of your effects by using higher frequencies. At 192K, you won't hear glitches until 120% of time stretching for example.

As a rule of thumb, you should always record, mix and master on the highest frequency available and then choose 48K for your final rendering. You never know when a client is going to phone you asking to get such part shortened to 16 seconds. 48K is a standard for most new compressed codecs out there (think mp4, aac, YouTube, Spotify).

If you need to release HD versions of your track (usually 96K or 192K), then it's also worth investing in next-level monitoring gear that allows you to hear every nook and cranny of your mixes very clearly.

You can think of an audio sample the same way as a video frame. More of it simply means that you can do higher quality processing.

The major downside of high frequency processing is how resource-intensive it may be. The space occupied by each project is also going to multiply in consequence.

I hope someone will find this useful, cheers!
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-05-2018, 08:40 AM
amagras amagras is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 2,170
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexandrepigeot View Post
I hope someone will find this useful, cheers!
Indeed, thanks. That was a very clear explanation.
__________________
Dell XPS 8700. Intel Core i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz. RAM: 16GB. Windows 10 Home x64. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645. NI Komplete Audio 6. Pro Tools 2018
amagrasmusic.com
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-09-2018, 10:50 AM
MatzeHD MatzeHD is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 86
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

Hi!
Yes, for Sampling, Sound FX Editing Timestreching etc. its not bad and possible better. For normal music production in the most cased its not needed and you have more problems for downconvert laters.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-09-2018, 03:42 PM
AlexLakis AlexLakis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 1,082
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

1. Depends on the converter. Some sound better at 44.1, some at 96, etc.. I could hear a difference every time on my RME converters; with my Apogee, no difference to my ears.

2. Depends on the plugin processing. Some plugins suffer from aliasing artifacts above Nyquist and require "oversampling" to get it right (or operation at a higher sample rate.) Some are fine either way.

Aside from that, overall, I think bit depth has a much higher impact on digital audio in general. I can almost always tell the difference between 24-bit and 16-bit audio by ear (depends on the source material).

Like several have said in this thread, there are soooo many tiny factors that add up to your music's final fidelity...The guitarist keeping his fingernails trimmed will have a much higher impact than sample rate every time. Use whatever makes sense to you, keeping in mind CPU impact, hard drive space, etc..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-11-2018, 09:11 PM
WernerF WernerF is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York City
Posts: 3,033
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexLakis View Post
1. Depends on the converter. Some sound better at 44.1, some at 96, etc.. I could hear a difference every time on my RME converters; with my Apogee, no difference to my ears.

2. Depends on the plugin processing. Some plugins suffer from aliasing artifacts above Nyquist and require "oversampling" to get it right (or operation at a higher sample rate.) Some are fine either way.

Aside from that, overall, I think bit depth has a much higher impact on digital audio in general. I can almost always tell the difference between 24-bit and 16-bit audio by ear (depends on the source material).

Like several have said in this thread, there are soooo many tiny factors that add up to your music's final fidelity...The guitarist keeping his fingernails trimmed will have a much higher impact than sample rate every time. Use whatever makes sense to you, keeping in mind CPU impact, hard drive space, etc..
44.1 is just fine for us here. We make records every day and the notion that a higher sample rate is better is, quite frankly, a bit ridiculous to us. The trade off of using way more processing power to allegedly have a higher quality of sound is a no brainer here. We choose the availability of more processing power every single time. I have never heard a difference between sample rates, ever. Have you, I mean really.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-11-2018, 09:45 PM
YYR123's Avatar
YYR123 YYR123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 13,273
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

This topic comes up once or twice a year....and you know what???

It doesn’t change people’s mind....opinions are like what? Everyone has one...

I believe you do hear a sonic impact but it taxes the machine pretty hard....I’ve been running 44.1k for years now.

Now that I think about it...I haven’t tracked anything with my HDX card @ 96k sounds like an interesting weekend project

It does use double the DSP on both Avid and Universal Audio
__________________
Daniel
HDX - PT12.5.1 - HD I/O 16x8x8
Win10-Pro (v1709)- 6 Core i7-6850k - ASUS X99 Deluxe ii
D-Command Main Unit - 'Ole Blue


http://www.sknoteaudio.com/ plugins rock and are affordable.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-12-2018, 07:26 PM
AlexLakis AlexLakis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 1,082
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by WernerF View Post
I have never heard a difference between sample rates, ever. Have you, I mean really.

I believe I have, but I chalk it up to hardware. That and mood. I've never done proper tests because I've always bled my systems for all they were worth at 44.1, so I never really had an option. Nowadays with modern processors and hard drive space cheap as hell, I could revisit it...But if I did switch to a higher sample rate, it would be to decrease latency, not for fidelity.


We'll see how my new Slate VRS-8s system performs...I hear they'll be on my front porch "soon".
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-13-2018, 09:30 PM
off the wall's Avatar
off the wall off the wall is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NYC-NJ
Posts: 98
Default Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

Seriously, if you can't hear the difference between 44.1 and even 48K, let alone 96k, you're in the wrong profession. Now 96 vs 192, not readily audible for me...

And while I'm on my soapbox. LOL. Please record everything at at least 24bit/48k. (32bitFloat/96k much better) The net effect of 20-100+ tracks initially passed through the required brick wall filters required for 44.1 is FAR more obnoxious than a single sample rate conversion back down to 44.1 for the final stereo mix.
__________________
offthewallproductions
Mac Pro 5,1 3.46 Ghz 12 core, AMD 7950 GPU, SSD boot drive on 6Gb/sec PCIe card, 22GB RAM, MacOS 10.13.3.
Pro Tools Ultimate 2018.4. HDX, UA Octo PCIe cards, HD I/O, C|24 control surface.
Mostly Avid, Waves, Sonnex and UAD Plug-ins
Genelec 1031AP/7070A 5.1 monitoring.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-13-2018, 10:21 PM
YYR123's Avatar
YYR123 YYR123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 13,273
Default 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?

I don’t agree with the 32 bit resolution

I think it makes the computer work harder, from what I have seen.

I have found 24 to be acceptable, as long as your not pushing the levels there isn’t a problem
__________________
Daniel
HDX - PT12.5.1 - HD I/O 16x8x8
Win10-Pro (v1709)- 6 Core i7-6850k - ASUS X99 Deluxe ii
D-Command Main Unit - 'Ole Blue


http://www.sknoteaudio.com/ plugins rock and are affordable.

Last edited by YYR123; 06-14-2018 at 06:51 AM.
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
Big Ben-Can you hear the difference? Dynamixaled Tips & Tricks 39 09-04-2011 03:03 PM
how much difference will I really hear? lastounce 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 2 08-27-2004 02:32 AM
Will I really hear a difference at 24Bit? Dal Hic Tips & Tricks 7 02-22-2003 11:42 PM
16, 20, 24 bits-can you hear the difference? Park Seward 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 23 03-01-2002 10:40 AM
192K and Electronic Music...will it make a difference? Hardnox Tips & Tricks 9 01-21-2002 02:43 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:48 PM.


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