88.2 benefits??

[TREXROCK]

Hey guys just upgraded to HD. I'm doing mostly full band stuff and I'm just wondering if anyone's seeing a huge sonic difference going up to 88.2 from 44.1. I know the best thing to do is try it myself, however I don't wanna do a whole session in 88.2 and it not really make a difference. The main reason I'm asking is because I wanna be able edit on my mbox micro which only plays back at 48 tops.

Also, does anyone record drums at 88.2 or 96 then take them down to 44.1 or 48 and then finish out the session at that sample rate?

Any help would be appreciated. Again I'm just trying to get a little feedback to see if it's really worth my time to attempt it. Alot of the other threads get off topic quickly so I hope this one can stay focused.

Thanks in advance.

[necjamc]

http://duc.digidesign.com/showthread.php?t=277012
This thread was recent, a lot of very pertinent information. Just get ready to read.

[studiojimi]

i almost always use it

i like it

[nst7]

I think the general consensus is that the with the higher sample rates, the benefit is subtle and not big enough to warrant the drawbacks such as extra hard drive space, higher CPU usage, etc.

One reason the Mbox micro doesn't go above 48khz is that in Digi's surveys they found that only 15% of users used sample rates higher than that. That might tell you something right there.

Also, most sample libraries don't go above 44 or 48.

[John_Toolbox]

There are two reasons I use more than 44.1 or 48khz...

1. If a client asks for it(never happened)
2. If you know you are going to do a lot of processing to the audio, (time compression/expansion and pitch shifting especially)... this way you have twice as many samples and thus half the chance of getting artifacts as a result of the processing.

Of course the problem with this is, if you have 2 samples that will become one when you convert sample rate dowen to 44.1, and one of them is screwed up, it may still end up that the one with the artifact wins. This brings the argument for using 192Khz, as you then have 4 samples, if one is bad and 3 are good you will get a good one when you reduce sample rate.

[WernerF]

Some say the difference is so subtle that the massive loss of resources doesn't warrent the subtle supposed sonic benefit. Some, including numerous digital audio designers, say that sample rate has no effect on audio quality. Personally, I agree with both camps. Call me deaf or crazy but I've never been able to hear a difference and I sure as he'll don't want to lose massive amounts of processing power just to kid myself into believing that things sound a little bit better at a higher sample rate. It's not exactly a stretch to suggest that great sounding instruments, a proper front end and awesome well used plugins will trump even the alledged minimal sonic advantage.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

Of course the problem with this is, if you have 2 samples that will become one when you convert sample rate dowen to 44.1, and one of them is screwed up, it may still end up that the one with the artifact wins. This brings the argument for using 192Khz, as you then have 4 samples, if one is bad and 3 are good you will get a good one when you reduce sample rate.

This is *NOT* how sample rate conversion works and can be pretty much ignored.

[Tweakhead]

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

Of course the problem with this is, if you have 2 samples that will become one when you convert sample rate dowen to 44.1, and one of them is screwed up, it may still end up that the one with the artifact wins. This brings the argument for using 192Khz, as you then have 4 samples, if one is bad and 3 are good you will get a good one when you reduce sample rate.

Originally Posted by JFreak

This is *NOT* how sample rate conversion works and can be pretty much ignored.

Does this mean my Bomb Factory "Bad Sample Spanker" plug-in isn't really doing much?

[WernerF]

Hopefully it can spank the power of suggestion.

[loosestones]

Just spent 2 weeks mixing with TLA, he dithers everything down to 44.1 before he starts mixing... interesting.