Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate  (Read 11605 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3149
  • Gender: Male
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #90 on: March 29, 2021, 06:41:12 PM »
aaronji, the AES needs to meet its operating expenses, and can't hold in-person conventions these days. I would urge people to consider either joining the Society, or paying their fees to download worthwhile papers, of which there are many many many.

That said, sometimes in a given case (I haven't checked this one) the authors of a paper may have their own Web site on which they've posted similar or equivalent information.
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3334
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #91 on: March 29, 2021, 06:58:49 PM »
^ Yes, I get that. As a scientist, I am encountering the same situation, with no (or online only) meetings for most of the professional societies and the accompanying cash squeeze. I guess I have gotten used to the "open access" model of publishing, however, which, coupled with the university subscriptions, enables me to get most of the papers I would like to read at no cost.

I'll think about buying this one, though, for the good of the cause, and because I think it is an interesting topic.

Offline rocksuitcase

  • (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7062
  • Gender: Male
    • RockSuitcase: stage photography
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #92 on: March 30, 2021, 02:19:12 PM »
aaronji, the AES needs to meet its operating expenses, and can't hold in-person conventions these days. I would urge people to consider either joining the Society, or paying their fees to download worthwhile papers, of which there are many many many.

That said, sometimes in a given case (I haven't checked this one) the authors of a paper may have their own Web site on which they've posted similar or equivalent information.
I have let my membership lapse many years ago. Back in the day one used to need two "sponsor" members in order to join/be approved. Is this still the case?
music IS love

When you get confused, listen to the music play!

Mics:         AKG460|CK61|CK1|CK3|CK8|Beyer M 201E|DPA 4060 SK
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3149
  • Gender: Male
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #93 on: April 01, 2021, 03:56:16 PM »
Two? I only remember having one such "sponsor" (David Griesinger), back in the 1970s.
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline EmRR

  • (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
    • ElectroMagnetic Radiation Recorders
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #94 on: April 01, 2021, 05:26:50 PM »
That's a VERY high-level summary of what I've been trying to get at here for recording at 24/96 (or higher). At the end of the day, for playback you are totally fine listening to and distributing online 16/44.1 data. However, if you have an easily-accessible archive of 24/96 or 24/192, it allows post production people doing remixing work or mastering work a LOT more precision to do their magic, and the end result of the signal processed with filters at 24/192 that is then bounced down to 16/44.1 sounds significantly better (to my ear, at least) than info that was bounced down then processed at 16/44.1.

I would wager that for me (and probably many other tapers) the audible benefits of processing at 24/96 versus 24/28 are pretty marginal. In my case, I doubt it is worth doubling the file sizes. The standard rejoinder: "Storage these days is cheap!" Well, maybe, but I have a couple of drives in my tower and several more in my NAS. I upgrade (and add more) every couple of years and it is not inexpensive in my mind. On top of that, I have a cloud backup option that also costs quite a bit per year and will cost more as I increase the capacity.

I would be curious to hear your comments on rates greater than 96 kHz. Lavry, for example, says that there is a trade-off between speed and accuracy and that the optimal sampling frequency is around 60 kHz, with 88.2 or 96 being the closest typically available rates. [Also perhaps of interest to you is his way of describing the time/frequency relationship using sinc instead of Fourier functions.]


Anecdotal as the say:  I just transferred a couple cassette masters at 88K2/24 and even at that rate, I found some processing that allows oversampling did indeed sound obviously (and not hairsplittingly either) better with oversampling, so that would be 176.4K processing.....on a cassette....YMMV.....

If you're dealing with cassettes or vinyl or reel to reel, and you need to do any time based corrections (stretching/shortening), higher rates will definitely give better results. 
Mics: DPA 4060 w/MPS 6030 PSU/DAD6001/DAD4099, Neumann KM 131, KMR 81i, Oktava MK 012, Sennheiser MKH 105, MKH 20, MKH 30, MKH 40, MKH 800 TWIN, lots of other studio appropriate choices
Recorders: Zoom F8n, Sony MZ-R50, portable MOTU based multitrack DAW for client work

Offline rocksuitcase

  • (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7062
  • Gender: Male
    • RockSuitcase: stage photography
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #95 on: April 01, 2021, 06:59:12 PM »
Two? I only remember having one such "sponsor" (David Griesinger), back in the 1970s.
That's a sponsor! I cannot recall, it may have been one. But it was our professor at SU, Bill Cooper. Are you aware if they still have this requirement?
music IS love

When you get confused, listen to the music play!

Mics:         AKG460|CK61|CK1|CK3|CK8|Beyer M 201E|DPA 4060 SK
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3149
  • Gender: Male
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #96 on: April 11, 2021, 09:45:44 AM »
> If you're dealing with cassettes or vinyl or reel to reel, and you need to do any time based corrections (stretching/shortening), higher rates will definitely give better results.

EmRR, there's no necessary reason why this should be so. If that's your experience, I would think that it's due to the particular software that you're using and not a general rule.

As long as all the energy of a continuous (analog) signal is below 1/2 the sampling rate, the complete information of that signal is contained in the samples, subject only to the quality of the conversion in terms of noise, distortion, etc. Any representation of that same signal at a higher sampling rate would contain no further, actual information about the signal. More numbers, yes--but not more information about the signal itself, just a more verbose restatement of the same information. As if I kept making the same point in various ways in the messages that I post, or as if I wrote in a redundant fashion--you get the idea.

One of my favorite processing devices is a Cedar AZX+ azimuth corrector. It has only digital inputs and outputs. You feed it a stereo signal at 44.1 or 48 kHz, and it resolves the time relationship between the two channels down to 1/100 of a sampling interval. According to the usual audiophile misunderstanding of digital audio this device cannot possibly exist, because supposedly a sampled waveform contains information "only at the moments when the samples themselves were taken"--yet here it is two feet to my left, and it works very nicely.

--best regards
« Last Edit: April 11, 2021, 09:47:57 AM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline capnhook

  • All your llamas are belong to us....
  • Site Supporter
  • (20)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 4311
  • All your llamas are belong to us....
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #97 on: April 11, 2021, 10:17:00 AM »
> If you're dealing with cassettes or vinyl or reel to reel, and you need to do any time based corrections (stretching/shortening), higher rates will definitely give better results.

EmRR, there's no necessary reason why this should be so. If that's your experience, I would think that it's due to the particular software that you're using and not a general rule.

As long as all the energy of a continuous (analog) signal is below 1/2 the sampling rate, the complete information of that signal is contained in the samples, subject only to the quality of the conversion in terms of noise, distortion, etc. Any representation of that same signal at a higher sampling rate would contain no further, actual information about the signal. More numbers, yes--but not more information about the signal itself, just a more verbose restatement of the same information. As if I kept making the same point in various ways in the messages that I post, or as if I wrote in a redundant fashion--you get the idea.


Thanks again DSatz, for clearing the muddy waters of higher sample rate fever.  Accurate info about this subject is sometimes hard to come by.
Proud member of the reality-based community

BSCS-L->JB-mod [NAK CM-300 (CP-3) and/or (CP-1)]->LSD2->CA CAFS-Omni->Sony ECM-907**Apogee MiniMe Rev. C->CA Ugly II->**Edirol OCM R-44->Tascam DR-22WL->Sony TCD-D8


"Don't ever take an all or nothing attitude when it comes to making a difference
and being beautiful and making the world a beautiful place through your actions.
Every little bit is registered.  Every little bit.  So be as beautiful as you can as often as you can"

"It'll never be over, 'till we learn."
 
"My dream is to get a bus and get the band and just go coast to coast. Just about everything else except music, is anti-musical.  That's it.  Music's the thing." - Jeb Puryear

Offline voltronic

  • (34)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3399
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #98 on: April 13, 2021, 06:25:33 AM »

As long as all the energy of a continuous (analog) signal is below 1/2 the sampling rate, the complete information of that signal is contained in the samples, subject only to the quality of the conversion in terms of noise, distortion, etc. Any representation of that same signal at a higher sampling rate would contain no further, actual information about the signal. More numbers, yes--but not more information about the signal itself, just a more verbose restatement of the same information. As if I kept making the same point in various ways in the messages that I post, or as if I wrote in a redundant fashion--you get the idea.


It always amazes me that people are willing to pay more for a 192 kHz version of an album from a high-rez digital music store. They assume it must have twice the resolution as the 96 kHz version! Even worse is when the tracks being sold are transfers of 1950s / 1960s analog tape recordings. Sure, those recordings might sound better than your old vinyl copies, but that's more to do with a higher-spec signal chain involved in a modern digital transfer than any sample-rate silliness. If the labels doing the new transfers want to work at 192 kHz for the sake of precision; fine. But to use that sample rate in the delivered tracks to customers is just ridiculous.
DPA 4061 ~ Line Audio CM3 ~ Naiant X-Q ~ AT 853  |  Naiant PFAs ~ Shure FP24  |  Zoom F6 ~ Sony PCM-M10
MOTU M2 ~ KRK Rokit RP5 ~ Sennheiser HD 650 ~ Etymotic ER4XR

Team Line Audio

Offline capnhook

  • All your llamas are belong to us....
  • Site Supporter
  • (20)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 4311
  • All your llamas are belong to us....
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #99 on: April 13, 2021, 06:30:19 AM »
If the labels doing the new transfers want to work at 192 kHz for the sake of precision; fine. But to use that sample rate in the delivered tracks to customers is Highway Robbery.

I am sure this is what you meant.

Proud member of the reality-based community

BSCS-L->JB-mod [NAK CM-300 (CP-3) and/or (CP-1)]->LSD2->CA CAFS-Omni->Sony ECM-907**Apogee MiniMe Rev. C->CA Ugly II->**Edirol OCM R-44->Tascam DR-22WL->Sony TCD-D8


"Don't ever take an all or nothing attitude when it comes to making a difference
and being beautiful and making the world a beautiful place through your actions.
Every little bit is registered.  Every little bit.  So be as beautiful as you can as often as you can"

"It'll never be over, 'till we learn."
 
"My dream is to get a bus and get the band and just go coast to coast. Just about everything else except music, is anti-musical.  That's it.  Music's the thing." - Jeb Puryear

Offline voltronic

  • (34)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3399
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #100 on: April 13, 2021, 07:03:37 PM »
If the labels doing the new transfers want to work at 192 kHz for the sake of precision; fine. But to use that sample rate in the delivered tracks to customers is Highway Robbery.

I am sure this is what you meant.

That too.

Here's a perfect example. 24/96 and 24/192 are the same price, but check out the price increases with the other formats.
https://www.hdtracks.com/#/album/5fb6a443b3dcc5a29ca21392
DPA 4061 ~ Line Audio CM3 ~ Naiant X-Q ~ AT 853  |  Naiant PFAs ~ Shure FP24  |  Zoom F6 ~ Sony PCM-M10
MOTU M2 ~ KRK Rokit RP5 ~ Sennheiser HD 650 ~ Etymotic ER4XR

Team Line Audio

Offline capnhook

  • All your llamas are belong to us....
  • Site Supporter
  • (20)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 4311
  • All your llamas are belong to us....
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #101 on: April 13, 2021, 08:27:22 PM »
If the labels doing the new transfers want to work at 192 kHz for the sake of precision; fine. But to use that sample rate in the delivered tracks to customers is Highway Robbery.

I am sure this is what you meant.

That too.

Here's a perfect example. 24/96 and 24/192 are the same price, but check out the price increases with the other formats.
https://www.hdtracks.com/#/album/5fb6a443b3dcc5a29ca21392



You can Hear The Difference between opening an empty wallet and a full one, too.


Great example, sir.  There ought to be a law against selling zeroes.
Proud member of the reality-based community

BSCS-L->JB-mod [NAK CM-300 (CP-3) and/or (CP-1)]->LSD2->CA CAFS-Omni->Sony ECM-907**Apogee MiniMe Rev. C->CA Ugly II->**Edirol OCM R-44->Tascam DR-22WL->Sony TCD-D8


"Don't ever take an all or nothing attitude when it comes to making a difference
and being beautiful and making the world a beautiful place through your actions.
Every little bit is registered.  Every little bit.  So be as beautiful as you can as often as you can"

"It'll never be over, 'till we learn."
 
"My dream is to get a bus and get the band and just go coast to coast. Just about everything else except music, is anti-musical.  That's it.  Music's the thing." - Jeb Puryear

Offline voltronic

  • (34)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3399
Re: 48 kHz vs 44.1 kHz sample rate
« Reply #102 on: April 15, 2021, 08:16:59 PM »
I did buy one 24/96 album from HDTracks years ago, and it was totally legit. It's actually one of the best sounding albums I have. Now it's only available as a 24/96 download direct from the label.

https://www.chandos.net/products/catalogue/CHAN%205044
DPA 4061 ~ Line Audio CM3 ~ Naiant X-Q ~ AT 853  |  Naiant PFAs ~ Shure FP24  |  Zoom F6 ~ Sony PCM-M10
MOTU M2 ~ KRK Rokit RP5 ~ Sennheiser HD 650 ~ Etymotic ER4XR

Team Line Audio

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14307
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: 48 KHz vs 44.1 KHz sample rate
« Reply #103 on: September 08, 2021, 06:11:02 PM »
Quote from: wforwumbo
The way digital filters work, ESPECIALLY a digital filter emulating an older analog filter - they approximate. They can internally upsample to help improve their performance and there's more wizardry under the hood we can run there, but even still; the higher the sample rate, the more precise and accurate the filter sounds. This just sounds SO much cleaner, better, and brighter. This filter accuracy CAN be heard both at the higher sample rates at 96 kHz, as well as after that 96 kHz master has been down-converted. It's not as subtle as you'd think, it's very audible.

Does it make any difference if the the entire raw recording is upsampled upon loading in the editor prior to filtering or is doing so essentially the same achieved by upsampling within the filtering being applied, except being less efficient?

Came across this video which somewhat addresses the question above which I've wondered about for years, regarding the value of localized upsampling performed within the instance of a filter, in contrast to upsampling the entire file prior to processing with the same filter without the filter applying upsampling locally, again in contrast with recording at a higher rate to begin with. 

https://youtu.be/-jCwIsT0X8M
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline morst

  • Trade Unionist
  • (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4716
Re: 48 KHz vs 44.1 KHz sample rate
« Reply #104 on: September 08, 2021, 07:53:21 PM »
Came across this video which somewhat addresses the question above which I've wondered about for years, regarding the value of localized upsampling performed within the instance of a filter, in contrast to upsampling the entire file prior to processing with the same filter without the filter applying upsampling locally, again in contrast with recording at a higher rate to begin with. 
https://youtu.be/-jCwIsT0X8M
Excellent video, thanks for the link.
Quote
FabFilter 90.4K subscribers
In this video tutorial, Dan Worrall explains when and why you should use higher samplerates for your recordings and mixing sessions, and more importantly... when you should NOT. Also, Dan goes in depth about oversampling vs. higher sample rates.

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.061 seconds with 44 queries.
© 2002-2021 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF