No video
96 kHz vs 48 kHz vs 44 kHz - What's (really) the Best Sample Rate for Audio? [2023]
Рет қаралды 61,752
Күн бұрын💥Download My Favorite FREE Mixing & Mastering Plugins Guide: bit.ly/plugin-book
Learn when 96 kHz sample rate will ACTUALLY make your music sound better! This video is the holy grail for EVERYTHING you need to know about sample rates and making music.
I go DEEP into the details to clear up a lot of misconceptions, marketing BS, and misunderstandings about digital audio and shows you the cold hard facts (with examples!) so you can make the best sounding music possible.
What you will learn:
👉 What is sample rate?
👉 Can you hear differences between 44, 48, and 96 kHz sample rates?
👉 What the best sample rate is for making music.
👉 When you will ACTUALLY HEAR a difference and when you won't.
Cheers to better sounding music 🤘
💥COURSES💥
🎓Complete Home Studio Mastering (💲10% OFF!): bit.ly/3q5HGZr
💥GEAR💥
📹Canon 77d: amzn.to/2BmN6sq
📷Sigma 18-35 mm Lens: amzn.to/2CY53hY
🎙Shure Beta 57 Microphone (Video): amzn.to/3prXseo
🎛 RME Babyface Pro FS (Interface): amzn.to/3hoBtTy
🗜Boom Stand for Mic: amzn.to/2YYjn0O
💡Ring Light: amzn.to/2Yj6qzB
💥SOCIAL💥
📹 Twitch (Watch LIVE!): / raytownproductions
🔗 Facebook: / raytownproductions
📷 Instagram: / raytownproductions
💥CONNECT💥
👋 Private Community: bit.ly/hsftgroup
⭐ Blog: www.raytownproductions.com/blog
📧 E-mail: bobby@raytownproductions.com
💙 Website: www.raytownproductions.com
💥LET'S WORK TOGETHER💥
Get a customized mixing and mastering package for your music!
🔊 bit.ly/2y1T78h
Please help support this channel! Some of the links below are affiliate links which doesn't cost you anything extra. At the same time, I also receive a small tip from each sale (basically like buying me a cup of coffee ☕ for helping you out with these high-quality videos).
It's a win win, and I very much appreciate it 😀
HASHTAGS
#HOMESTUDIO #SAMPLERATE #TUTORIALS
⌚TIMESTAMPS⌚
00:00 - Intro
00:51 - Download My Favorite FREE Plugins Guide!
01:33 - What Is Sample Rate?
04:04 - There are 3 advantages for recording at 96 kHz sample rate
05:57 - The Shannon-Nyquist Theorem
06:23 - WTF Is Aliasing and What Does It Sound Like?
07:14 - How to Minimize Aliasing?
08:58 - How to Minimize Aliasing at 44 and 48 kHz Sessions
10:12 - Sampling Rates and Amplitude Resolution
10:58 - True Peak Metering
11:21 - What Are Intersample Peaks (ISP)?
13:00 - When Higher Sample Rates Make A Difference
15:14 - Do This If You Plan To Do Lots of Edits!
15:41 - Results of My Blind Shootouts
16:54 - Hear the Difference Between the Time Stretching Algorithms
21:37 - Summary of Main Points
24:10 - What Separates a PRO Recording from an Amateur
25:11 - Download My Favorite FREE Plugins Guide 🎁
@eefmydee1slideways 2 жыл бұрын
Absolutely killer vid my dude. You brought new information on a discussion that has been beaten to death (most people just repeat other people's info). Good job with this example. Keep it going.
@jacobskovsbllknudsen5908 2 жыл бұрын
Great video, in-depth explanations, solid. I record at 48kHz if I record for music production. For foley and sound design experiments, I always record at 96kHz - it's always nice to able explore the otherwise inaudible material of especially ambient recordings. So, 48 kHz for when you know what you want on the recording, and 96kHz when you want to explore.
@jhughs3 2 жыл бұрын
Great video. A couple years ago I asked on a forum if there was a benefit to recording at 96kHz if time-adjusting. I got some great insights into 44/48 vs 96kHz but no answered about stretching audio. So thanks! Great to have that question answered!
@javieral1448 Жыл бұрын
Thank you for using such a direct and acúrrate language on the subjects exposed on the video. Very enlightening.
@nicolassvane4035 Жыл бұрын
Hey there! I discovered your channel while searching about audio bit depth, and I am loving your videos on this topic. Also because I a studing electronics Engineering, and I am learning about Sampling Theoreme, pretty cool coincidence. My comment is to support your channel and also to ask you about sources of information that mix this topics with music, to go a little bit further. Thanks!
@tjerborfritzasnt5942 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much, such a highly informative video. I think one point you could have touched upon would be that if a file is going to be slowed or pitched down, that a higher Sample rate file might also sound better because a lot of the before inaudible stuff moves into the audible range in contrast to a 44.1khz where it capped at ~20khz and after lowering pitch or time, the cap also moved lower creating a high cut and leaving the high shelf empty making it sound dull.
@kiko8u 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you, Oversampling options especially in saturation and analog emulations plugins is very important.
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Absolutely! If your computer can handle it, turn on that oversampling!
@ifrias 10 ай бұрын
Thanks, that was very enlightening.
@doug941 2 жыл бұрын
Great video Bobby! Thank you!
@sebastiancuthbertmusic 4 ай бұрын
Man, what an insight! Great Video! thanx
@gregfender 2 жыл бұрын
Awesome video dude! I normally work in 48k almost exclusively, but I might start up sampling for editing sessions! Good to know!
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Exactly! For typical mixing work, 44/48 is probably fine. But editing I will ALWAYS be upsampling from now on.
@arupsircar4855 Жыл бұрын
Excellent review.,. thnx bro 👍
@MuddyRainMusic Жыл бұрын
You are pretty close, but for me the benefit of working at 96 is that anti aliasing filters on my interface don’t give me high end phase shift in the audible range, but at 44.1 and 48 they do and I don’t like the harshness. It’s most noticeable on things like hihats, cymbals, clean electric guitar, and vocals.
@chinmeysway Жыл бұрын
What converter does this apply to? I’m just trying to think if this is also happening with my set up as well..
@RBBlackstone Жыл бұрын
When I first used 96k with a real drummer, the cymbals sounded close to analog tape again. I just used a 2” tape machine and it was down 3dB at 30kHz. You need source material that shows that difference to hear it. I think 96k has better phase and group delay characteristics. Most instruments do not have harmonics above 10k to make a difference.
@6643bear 7 ай бұрын
Great and interesting video, all also depends how you ears and brain process the ability the audio, regards Mark
@bigkidband5731 2 жыл бұрын
Good stuff, Bobby! On another note. Which one of your previous videos shows you using the Lindell Series 50 API plugin? I dug through your videos, but couldn’t find it. Thanks! One of my favorite channels by the way! Keep it up!
@stephenpertesis7710 Жыл бұрын
Artifacts from internal oversampling of plugins exist. I sometimes use a difference mix session for the element in question against a stereo bounce of everything else = no aliasing or artifacts. I bounce each stem out of their respective 96k sessions AT 96k so that the compression and basic eq & saturation are "baked in" without those aforementioned issues. I then convert THOSE bounces to new 48k bounces which just downsamples it enough to compile all of the together into one cpu friendly session for a full mix. Any further plugins that might cause a bit of aliasing are usually minimal at that point. Volume automations, some ducking, and it's good. Just to be safe, I usually only use roughly 2 reverbs on each production. Those reverbs/settings are mirrored across all session files for that song. I will sometimes commit the reverb to 96k stems as well. Yes, I often have to make revisions and further bounces from the 96k stem sessions. ...all because I can't afford 100k in hardware haha
@AndriiAdamian 8 ай бұрын
OMG, thanks man, You have smashed down this damned subject for me, finally. Clean and crystal, thanks again!
@RaytownProductions 8 ай бұрын
Haha so glad it helped!
@jimpemberton 2 жыл бұрын
I'm coming from a FOH perspective. There's a trend toward larger sample rates in new digital FOH systems. Most of the people having discussions of sample rates are among recording engineers, so I'm looking for more answers, particularly as it applies to live production. The aliasing makes sense. If you are summing two signals at the same frequency that are fraction of a sample out of phase, you can theoretically end up with a sum that has an artificial frequency within the audible range. This is especially true if you do parallel processing on a signal that doesn't have good time alignment correction in its processing.
@shoepedals Жыл бұрын
This would cause a phase cancellation (comb filtering) issue regardless of the sample rate.
@jimpemberton Жыл бұрын
@@shoepedals I'm talking about sum and cancellation in very high frequencies that in a lower sample rate results in a wave shape or synthetic frequency in the audible harmonic structure that alters the tone of the sound, particularly if the system has multiple resamples in the signal chain (Digital wireless mic with analog out to digital preamps for a console that has analog outs to the DSP that has analog outs to the amps.). A higher sample rate won't have this problem.
@needsLITHIUM 2 жыл бұрын
I think 48 is the best balance and also makes computations for oversampling easier on your CPU. 48 is also the industry standard for audio embedded in video for streaming, DVD, and BluRay. If you're not doing time stretching, 48 is fine. If you're doing time stretching, sure, go for 96 or 192. But as you said, you could just up sample the one audio clip, so...
@EirikHasselberg 2 жыл бұрын
Nice and detailed explanations! Thanks Bobby. I mix and record in 48 kHz, I think that is the "new" 44.1 for many reasons.
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Video is definitely pushing it in this direction. It's also nice to have a bigger "window" to reduce aliasing and the effects of the anti-aliasing filter. Cheers!
@drinkinslim 2 жыл бұрын
I record and mix at 48kHz ,while my music buddy does everything at 44.1 and he sends stuff as MP3s. Both of those drive me crazy, especially because I render my stems at 48kHz 24 bit and I know it's going to convert at his end into 44.1. If he send me stuff back it's going to be upconverted to 48kHz again. And MP3s just mess with the bottom and top end. Smeared lows and dull highs.
@MichaelW.1980 2 жыл бұрын
You might want to add: MP3 does mess with it no matter if it’s 44.1 or 48 kHz, due to its compression, which is quite lossy. Converting 44.1 to 48 kHz does not change anything in sound, unless ofc you let the windows mixer do the job. You can not regain missing frequencies and the ones that are there at 44.1 kHz will sound the same, no matter how many samples you add to match whatever desired sampling rate.
@rafaelsencine4946 8 ай бұрын
Amazing Lesson man!
@digitaltrash_ 2 жыл бұрын
I don't know about you guys.. But I noticed that working at 96khz gives next pros: Synths calculated more accurately, its sounds more detailed and pronounced. Reverb has more open feel, also giving closer to life result. Delay has more details, sounds repeats more clearly. And you always can transpose 96khz down without losing highend. Cons: it's takes more space and eats more CPU.
@ELISHACAEZ 2 жыл бұрын
Using an older workstation with a 96khz sample rate and I can tell that the detail of the high end is easier to follow when I'm mixing as if I can hear where the sound is coming from in the mix better, even for dirtier mixes. Maybe it's placebo but idk
@digitaltrash_ 2 жыл бұрын
@@ELISHACAEZ I think it's big advantage, even aliasing will be dramatically lower. I always getting like "real life sound" while working and writing in 96khz. All effects seems to give more quality than they can at 48khz for example.
@ali32 2 жыл бұрын
hi, sorry but i'm very new to this and searched a ton, but i couldn't find something that could help in my situation i want a battery shotgun mic that could get that 96Khz, is it even has anything to do with the mic?? could i get any mic that i want and connect it to a pc and record at 96khz?? i would really appreciate if you could help, thanks a lot
@KitKalvert Жыл бұрын
@@ali32 Allow me to help. Yes any mic that you use can be recorded at 96khz sample rate, and will sound better as opposed to say 44.1khz. Also any software plugins or Virtual Synths you may be using if on a DAW on PC will also sound clearer but takes double the CPU power and also disk space for storage. I hope this helps mate.
@JM_2019 Жыл бұрын
All of the pros can also be achieved with upsampling within the plug in.
@johnnydove 2 жыл бұрын
nice! i'm definitely going to upsample when i edit now, that seems to solve the problem of "oops i picked the wrong algorithm this sounds bad", especially when going from electric DI to bass or acoustic where it matters a lot more
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Exactly! It makes such a big difference and I wish I knew about this sooner.
@renahere1885 2 ай бұрын
Hi...This was really helpful...thanks! So, I have started on GarageBand on an iPad pro in recent years, doing my vocals on a 16 bit/48 (44?) khz mic...It records great, but, has a very small screen. I'm a trained vocalist, with some higher tones forward in places and supported notes, and have been noticing on certain range, a spot once in a while, where it will make that slight fuzz, barely detectable, only with headphones. Couldn't master it out, had to re-record that line. I'm thinking to graduate to a new USB condensor mic with 24/96, having several songs to record the vocals on and on sale. ..and hoping it will give me more "presence" . (I have several gadgets-apps to add width etc....) Appreciate your video.👍 This helped clarify the difference... I'm still undecided to spend the money now, which I will if I have to...👍ps: If you have any extra input for me on the subject...much appreciated!
@DrMikeMetal 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the detailed video and great research behind the scenes! Just confirming - indeed, higher sample rates make flex time editing in Pro Tools so much better. I recently recorded metalcore drums at 88.2 kHz (with no real reason), and after heavy editing, everyone involved in the project was blown away. Much fewer editing artefacts and much more transparent result.
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
That's awesome! I haven't heard anyone else ever mentioning this, so I'm glad to hear you had a similar experience. Everything was pretty apparent that the higher sample rates are way better for editing. Thanks for sharing your experience!
@DrMikeMetal 2 жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions I wasn't expecting this and that was an accident, so now your video proves the concept! I'll aim to record at higher sample rates where I can. Some outboard gear in the studio only allows 48 so that's a limitation. If very heavy editing is needed, I'll disregard that gear now, after knowing this principle
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
@@DrMikeMetal good news! This trick works even if you record at lower sample rates! Just upsample then edit and then down sample back to your native rate. Best of both worlds!
@DrMikeMetal 2 жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions great approach, done!!
@photoniccannon2117 29 күн бұрын
That's one of the main reasons I use higher sample rates. I will often do a lot of tempo stretching early on with the bed tracks to get certain variations in. Any time I'm doing this kind of work on a project, higher sample rates are a lifesaver.
@rhythmphocusband4083 10 ай бұрын
My comment may be trivial- but a few years ago I recorded a track as a warm up while awaiting for other band mates to arrive. The engineer recorded me playing bass (Chameleon-Herbie Hancock) at 384 sample rate. I couldn’t even believe the difference - it was perfect. I was sold thennn with the exception that most folks record at a lower rate.
@dromer1967 2 жыл бұрын
I'm glad I came across your channel whilst 'researching' headphone mixing plugins because this is another great video! Clear explanation and nice to see it summed up in one video. Might I ask what your thoughts are when it comes to bit depth? I know 24 bits gives a larger dynamic range so I can understand why you should/could prefer it over 16 bits but what is the point of, when I look into Cubase 12, 32 bits and 32 bits float and 64 bits float? 24-bits already gives a dynamic range way beyond what we can hear it seems :) Curious to what your opinion is (or perhaps make a video about that too ;)) Update: Ha ha, I just looked at your video list and already see a video which seems to address this. I'm watching it now ;)
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Beat me to it! The bit depth video is great. Glad you find these helpful! Cheers 🙂
@user-ff9rx7kq2g 2 күн бұрын
Thank you thank you thank you very much
@thinkingfield 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for making these immensely helpful videos!
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
My pleasure!
@thinkingfield 2 жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions Just wondering, doesn't using a low pass set at about 20Khz do away with any aliasing at 44.1K sample rate?
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
@thinkingfield good point! But it doesn't always work that way. The trick is that the aliasing needs to be removed BEFORE it is folded back into our hearing range. This is why it's important to do this within the plugins right after the audio is internally upsampled.
@DerekPower 2 жыл бұрын
I have been all over the place as far as what sample rate to use for tracking and mixing. Most of the time, I use 44.1 as it gets the job done for what I normally do and it's often going to end up that way in the end. For instance, I have learned that when cutting records from a digital source, it's at 44.1. I have used 48 and I may use that more as that is what is used for video. I'm kinda miffed that 88.2 is not a more common option - you have to get a high-end field recording device to have it as an option - because it is cleaner to downsample from there to 44.1 by half compared to 0.459375 from 96. I would say that the only reason why you would want to *record* at a higher sample rate from the start is if you have certain analogue gear with some superharmonic colour you would like to see printed into the digital realm.
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Same! I typically go with 48 khz so it's compatible with video but I can't really hear much of a difference between 44/48. But with editing, man it is so much better at 96 or even 192!
@stephenpertesis7710 Жыл бұрын
Yes, but you are bouncing with aliasing and artifacts from internal oversampling. Some plugin companies either cannot or will not even say to what degree their products oversample.
@erkamau9629 Жыл бұрын
Ciao, great work ! A question, wich kind of edits, apart time strecthing, is rilevant to prefer higher sample rate ? If have to upsample to 96 isn't better to work at 48 than 44.1 (2x multiplier..) ? If is better to upsample why do not record at 96 from the beguinning ? Because for tracking we get lower latency too; ok cpu work more but today is not a real problem, thinking to record an instrument with only a vst (rev or channel strip) on performing over only a single stereo audio file (temp mix as "karaoke"..) with no other vst on. So at the end the other option is oversampling that can give preringing issues with equalizers, solved adding a Q and small bump at the cutoff, or I a missing anything ?
@GenilsonOficial 4 ай бұрын
Note: If I'm not mistaken, some Universal Audio plugins only work with oversampling above 96k. Working with high sampling can be advantageous to reduce latency.
@woopeedyscoop1858 Жыл бұрын
i bet it just must be upsampled on stretch algo level. or even better - we should have ability to select oversampling for stretching anyway great vid, thanks!
@JazzBear Жыл бұрын
I make part of my living recording overdubs first different recording studios from my remote studio. Most of them ask for me to record at 48. But I have one client that always asks for 96. I do what they ask. But when I do my own stuff I usually just record at 48.
@mrmorpheus9707 2 жыл бұрын
Great vid
@youknowwho7502 2 жыл бұрын
best vid to date on this
@tiomkinnyborg2289 4 ай бұрын
Great vid. Explains everything. Is there a system or plugin to correct the metering problem. The sound is generated by the daw so why not just do the up-sampling when needed if a peak is high enough to be inter and calculate the true peak from there for the meter?
@RaytownProductions 4 ай бұрын
I believe that is exactly how it's done 😁 I think 8X oversampling will catch almost all ISPs (but not all of them).
@KnightRiderKARR 2 жыл бұрын
I record at 96KHz because i have much better detail at high frequencies (above 10KHz) especially on drums. You can also try bone conduction (wired - piezoelectric as bone conduction) and you able perceive around 50KHz (the vibration goes directly to cochlear through skull // bypasses the eardrums) but you need increase 30dB above 20KHz in EQ to start hearing - offcourse it depends if some people are able to hearing with this method.
@contraspower6302 Жыл бұрын
If we record at 96khz can we mix at 44.1khz or 48khz??? I'm asking this coz my computer can't handle 96khz recordings?
@erkamau9629 Жыл бұрын
in the samplerate conversion phase, ITB, it doesn't matter the adc/dac quality but the audio engine of the DAW, for example the rendering in Ableton is the worst one, so I we could test the quality of SRC in our DAW ? Or must we use, outside of Daw, sowftare as RX of Izotope to this specifica task ? for one track ok but when we have many ones isn't ok to work smoothly if we must resample (two times too) outside the DAW. Is there any high quality src plugin vst ?
@ButcherGrindslam Жыл бұрын
One more benefit of 96 Khz over 48 and 44,1 - lower latency during recording. Buffer size is always in samples, not ms. That means that buffer size of 96 samples in 96 KHz is lower than in 44.1. That's more convenient for guitar recording.
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Great point!
@GenilsonOficial 4 ай бұрын
Great! An observation that I have not seen anywhere and that puts an end to the controversial discussion.
@DylanGalvinMusic 3 ай бұрын
Now when you say editing - what if you are just comping a vocal? No time stretching. Just choping and moving sections forward or back to get a perfect vocal but not stretching and doing minimal effects? Is it still recommended to record in 96 or upsample to 96 for editing?
@jamoinsen. Жыл бұрын
You guys said 96 if time stretching, so if I want to record vocals and want the vocals later to speed up (not down) I should also do 96khz for it?
@MusicWizard85 Жыл бұрын
Thank you for this. I'm on the fence between 2 digital mixers: Yamaha DM3S which supports 96kHz or Mackie DLZ Creator which has 24bit/48kHz. My main use would be home music studio work. I write music and play every instrument. I feel like the Mackie would meet my needs even though it has less inputs, it's $900 cheaper than the Yamaha. Do I need the 96kHz to write an album or would I be ok with 48kHz?
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
You are totally fine with 48 khz in my opinion. 🤘 Safe the money for something else that gets you inspired to write music.
@WorshipShed Жыл бұрын
Fantastic
@DrTomb Жыл бұрын
Why doesn't the audio just clip at Hearing range? I don't get why it isn't automatically clipped.
@HoneyJonson 2 ай бұрын
How could i RIP CDs - and keep the CD wav format sound original sound quality (lower memory MB's(GB) usages on my PC hard drive) ?
@Schallkoma_Rockenberg 9 ай бұрын
for me its still 44,1. i dont know why but it sounds much better. it has a special vibe 😃
@jimcrowley1709 Жыл бұрын
I do a tremendous amount of vintage audio restoration. The default for me is two channel 24/96 because of the amount of manipulation of the audio to make it pristine. My final product is 16/48
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Higher sample rates will DEFINITELY be helpful for this type of work. Thanks so much for commenting!
@bruno_dias 9 ай бұрын
It's all in your head ;) 24 bits resolution (bits/sample) is better. Yes. Period. 96KHz is just stupid if you know the mathematics behind analog-digital-analog conversion. Because we can't build perfect output filters, using a higher sample rate than the theoretical sample rate will resolve eventual aliasing noise in the higher frequencies above 21KHz and close to 22KHz (which 99.9% of humans can't even hear)... But 48KHz is more than enough and with very good output filters you can use 44.1KHz perfectly fine for human hearing.
@4050Sixty Ай бұрын
How do you bounce from higher sample rates to lower ones? Can you just change the sample rate on my daw and rebounce?
@eternalgospels 2 жыл бұрын
I dont understand this because when i record and mix at 96khz, the mixes sound cleaner, more open, and wider stereo. You and many say the same things the higher sample rates does not improve quality, but my ears tell me the contrary.
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Try a double blind test. There is a software called abx to do blind shootouts. If you know which is which going in, you might have an unconscious bias. This is the only way to know for sure. In blind shootouts for the music I mix, I cannot statistically tell a difference. Hope that helps!
@SpirosPoullos 2 жыл бұрын
Very nice video! Thanks! And what about DSD/1bit Stream audio?
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
I have some mixed feeling on this. Let me do some research and get back to you 😊
@Reticuli 7 ай бұрын
You can't process 1bit DSD. It can only be simply edited like trimming and splicing, or else it must be converted to another format.
@SpirosPoullos 7 ай бұрын
@@Reticuli yes but you can process it with analog equipment, right?
@davidcottrell1308 2 жыл бұрын
This guy is spot on!
@RicardoGarcia-sd1xb 4 ай бұрын
Wouldn’t it be better to use over sampling than to use higher sample rates? In my case I use more non-linear plug-ins than I use time stretch, and inter-modulation is worst with higher sample rates (unless you filter anytime you use a nonlinear plug-in).
@elyot4010 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for explanation of oversampling. Great channel! I'm not a bot
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Haha of course 🙂
@ReadyRahh 11 ай бұрын
Does all of this matter for vocals as well? I’m a rapper and I am looking to get the best quality out of my music when I mix & master my work. What is the best sample rate to record for an artist?
@RaytownProductions 8 ай бұрын
44.1 khz and up 🤘 There is some minor benefit going above 44Khz if you are using distortion or non linear effects as long as they are coded correctly.
@technoisbeautiful Ай бұрын
Technically, if you look at the behaviour of the tweeter of your speaker, and if it is capable of moving above 22kHz, it will make a difference in clarity of the high frequency content played. similar like the front plate of a guitar body (where the strings are attached), you get some kind of Lissajous-Figures. And hence the audio will be distorted - whether that's audible or not, that's another question.
@GameZone-qx7tx Жыл бұрын
Please ask, sir, this is related to the Type C to Jack Audio Converter Adapter which already has a DAC, there are several options on the marketplace, some are 24bit/96 khz, then some are 32 bit/384khz, which one is the best at capturing small sounds but sounds clear which one bro? this is for the case of playing PUBG games to be more sensitive to listening to distant enemy steps.
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
In that case you would want bit depth. The only real advantage I think you will have is going from 16 bit to 24 bit. 32 bit would in theory be the best but I'm not sure you have your speakers loud enough for this to make a difference. It's very rare that you would perceive an increase in quality from 24 to 32 bit.
@sonario6489 2 жыл бұрын
So using those upsample sites don't really have any diminishing effect?
@nadersharif Жыл бұрын
Which audio interface you are using? I recorded at 48k and have found recording at 96k definitely improved my sound. I don't do any time stretching. At 96k I had better stereo image, cleaner higher frequency and better low end.
@RaytownProductions 8 ай бұрын
Remember ufx and a minidsp flex connected by adat. Very strange! Is the difference in raw tracks or processed tracks with plugins? Have you tried down sampling the session to 44 khz and then doing a blind shootout? I've never been able to hear any statistically significant differences...
@nadersharif 8 ай бұрын
@@RaytownProductionsThank you for your reply, the difference I heard was even on the raw tracks without any processing plugins. While it's true that humans can't hear anything above 20 kHz but they can hear the audible difference when capturing at higher sample rates. It is to do with the DAC and how good your converter is. At lower frequency the converter tends to produce unwanted distortion which will be avoided or minimised at higher frequency. Don't take my word for it please read what Bob Kats wrote on this subject. Create a session at 48 kHz and just simply play any instrument low to high octaves through your audio interface and then change it to 96k and tell me you can't hear a difference.
@jevrimerdi 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks Joe Satriani
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
haha you bet ;)
@bobbybedsole7583 Жыл бұрын
This killed me
@sarahhey8654 11 ай бұрын
Needs sunglasses 😎
@singa8864 4 ай бұрын
Thought about it for 1 second. Then I continued to watch till I accidentally see the comment. Nice one @jevrimerdi😂
@AlecBridges 2 ай бұрын
😂
@christopherdunn317 8 ай бұрын
Well 2inch reel to reel tape with the best Dolby -s reduction was around 13 bits ! so 16 would be better, and so 24 bit as well and 44.1 or 48khz, so really if you want to sound better be like van halen if you can, and you will sound better !
@VANILLA0010 Жыл бұрын
The airyness is better makes it Sound more natural/realistic, depending also more spacy & full or rich
@alicereasonsofficialartist7167 2 жыл бұрын
Nice to know you can mix a project at 96k and then bounce your mix so it sell to a 192kpbs mp3!
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
😂😂😂
@JustinLesamiz Жыл бұрын
You still have to consider how all the individual tracks blend together. It still matters, even when the final product is an mp3.
@mickael486 8 ай бұрын
Great video. I bought a DAC that can easily do 96khz but no matter what I listen to, and no matter from what device, it is ALWAYS 48khz. What's my problem?
@mickael486 5 ай бұрын
48khz on PS5 too. ??
@antonm_ 2 жыл бұрын
Great video. I just have 1 clarification if you don't mind. If a 44.1kHz file can be upsampled to 96kHz and be treated like it was 96k in the first place, how is it different if I just record at 44.1kHz and just upsample later for editing (assuming I don't really need to record frequencies greater than 22kHz)? Since ISP and time stretching artifacts can be handled by upsampling, I am wondering if it even matters that something is recorded at just 44.1kHz.
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
This is a good question. From what I can tell from my experiments and testing I did, you can probably just record at 44 or 48 kilohertz and up sample just for editing. Then I recommend down sampling back to one of those formats to do the mixing in mastering. If your plugins offer oversampling you then have the best of both worlds.
@antonm_ 2 жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions Cool! Thanks for the reply. To be clear, I am not refuting your advice though; it is still good advice to go 96 if you can, but if you forgot, it is not the end of the world. And as you said, there are plenty other things that matter to a good mix than the sample rate. 😅
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
@@antonm_ totally agree. The higher rates can definitely help with aliasing reduction and lower noise floor (it's complicated how that works, but it's really something that happens), so I totally agree. If you can swing it, 96 can sometimes be beneficial. 🤘
@bigdaddycool1000 Ай бұрын
CD Quality for me was and is always good enough.
@drinkinslim 2 жыл бұрын
I record at 48kHz because I hear more "air" in the audio. I know this shouldn't be the case, in theory, but I think it has to do with the filters - higher sample rates have higher filters so less air is removed at the top end.
@MuddyRainMusic Жыл бұрын
I think you are close but it’s the opposite, the filters at 96 are high enough where they have no effect on the audible range, where as at 44.1 or 48 it sounds a little brighter because the filters are closer to the audible range and steep enough to cause resonance in the upper audible range. So 48 is adding high end from the bump of the anti aliasing filters.
@user-dx9fz1pl5b Жыл бұрын
its bullshit dude
@JiihaaS 10 ай бұрын
@@MuddyRainMusic ideally the roll-off of an anti-alias filter starts from 0dB and heads towards -inf. dB, so there really should be no bump at the cutoff frequency when it comes to frequency response. Instead, the resonance you're talking about is caused by the steepness of the roll-off. Perhaps ringing would be a better word to describe what's actually happening, since the cutoff frequency "rings" for longer after a steep filter cut. You can see and hear it for example by bandpassing a pure sine wave at the exact same frequency the wave's at, with a very high Q (and a typical constant-peak bandpass filter to make sure the frequency response is at 0dB where the sine wave is). Turn the wave on/off without fade ins and outs, and you should notice it takes the length of the filter's impulse response to actually change between on/off state, instead of changing instantly as it was before the filter.
@InaktiverUser Жыл бұрын
If i use a Session in my daw with 32bit float and 48khz should my microphone Settings also Set To 48khz?
@felixftp9670 Жыл бұрын
Yes
@caebo Жыл бұрын
Great video! What about recording at 44.1 and exporting the mix and master at 192khz to prevent aliasing and so on? And then resample it down to 44.1khz for distribution. Does it makes sense?
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
It does indeed! If your plugins don't have oversampling, this is an option worth exploring. Personally for me and my mixing workflow, I couldn't pick out a 96 khz export from the native 48 khz in a blind shootout. I could hear a big difference on the individual instruments when solo'd but not in a full mix. This was also verified with a blind shootout. I have a video coming on this exact thing. Great question! I say give it a shot and see if it's worth the effort 🙂
@caebo Жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions Thanks for the response. I changed a session sample rate of a production/mix/master I finished at 44.1 to 96khz (I do everything in the same project because of "creativity")...boy the sound is SO different, some plugins really behave intensively different at higher sample rates, the most notorious being the Wavesfactory Cassette. I also use A LOT of IK multimedia T-RACKS plugins, although they have oversampling, that little bit of aliasing does stack up when you have 20+ analog modeled plugins going up...high end it's just different at higher sample rates. For my next project, I'm really considering in doing/separating the 3 step process as it should be so my cpu can handle plugins at 96khz. I learn a lot with your videos! Keep the excellent content!
@rickblackers88 Жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions Hi, great video!! There is some language limitations, i'm from Brazil, if i understand i can record in 48khz then open another project with say 88khz or 96khz and convert the tracks to this higher sample rate for mixing so taking advantage of a higher processing in the plugins?Is that correct? Thanx !!
@caebo Жыл бұрын
@@rickblackers88 Isso mesmo!
@rickblackers88 Жыл бұрын
@@caebo thanx obrigado gracias
@Detailguy101 2 жыл бұрын
I have an adv dongle dac that does up to 24/48. Do you think that’s good enough for streaming music with iems with iPhone? I was thinking about getting a dongle dac that does up to 192.
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
I don't think you need to worry about higher sample rates - that isn't going to improve the quality of the sound. What's important is the quality of the DAC itself in terms of signal to noise and distortion (SINAD). As long as your dongle is higher than your phone, you should get an improvement to the sound... whether that is actually audible or not is another question haha! Cheers :)
@Detailguy101 2 жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions ok thank you!
@Saimishi Жыл бұрын
I’m fact using focusrite interfaces setting anything besides 48kHz caused issues for me I would get static and no audio at times set it to 48 no issues
@chinmeysway Жыл бұрын
Aw damn this just happened to me! Seems this was why. Except I’ve mostly recorded at 44.1, no issues. I think there’s some setting that’s fixed on the I/o software - mine is stuck at 44 pretty sure. Could be related
@Reticuli 7 ай бұрын
'Tape' style is basically just SRC and is as perfect as you're going to get other than pitch change.
@hr2186 Жыл бұрын
What equivalent would 7.5 ips tape be close too...44khz? I ask because I don't like bright recordings
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Probably closer to something like 35khz to be honest. I would just keep the sample rate where it is and add a LPF with a gentle slope like 6db/Oct to roll off the bright top end.
@acecomet 2 ай бұрын
Did you went to a recording school? I was wondering cause if you do. You would know that 44,1khz and 96khz are incompatible. 44.1khz and 48khz are two different type. To record higher sample rate for 44.1khz you would use x2 to 88.2khz.
@zefrog7482 Жыл бұрын
Really interesting. Would I be right in thinking that when audio is put onto CD format that the mix has frequencies above 22.5Khz removed to prevent aliasing? 🤔
@zefrog7482 Жыл бұрын
@MF Nickster so am I right in thinking music copied to CD via a competent mixer will have the majority of aliasing dealt with? Only it's not something I've ever really noticed, wondering if there is there is a technique used to counter such things or do they just churn them out regardless but I've just been lucky enough to not notice? I should imagine once someone does notice it really becomes quite the issue, thankful for my ears not being golden, that's for sure.
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
There are anti aliasing filters built into our converters (DAC and ADC) that deal with a lot of this if those extra frequencies. This is why we don't hear it ALL the time. However, poorly coded plugins that don't handle aliasing well will get some of these artifacts in our music that are "locked in" to the sound and can't really be removed when changing the audio in the digital environment. Good question!
@zefrog7482 Жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions Thankyou.👍🙂 Really is all very interesting, amazing how a lot of this is all completely overlooked by so many including myself until now, really makes you appreciate the complexities that go along with music formats and production. I was kind of very naive as many probably have been, I mean I was of the thought it's just recording and mixing to a point it sounds good and jobs a gooden.
@zefrog7482 Жыл бұрын
Just subscribed, eager to learn more despite not creating music.🙂👍
@vicfirth1 Жыл бұрын
If you work in music for a film, they always use 48 kHz so you do need to do that for that.
@robertdevoy3119 Жыл бұрын
So for an older excellent analog recording such as David Bowie Ziggy Stardust that was remastered into 24/96 could the same quality have been obtained remastering into 16/44?
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
For me personally, I can't statistically tell the difference when I master a song at 44/16 and 96/24. I've done numerous blind shootouts and it's almost indistinguishable. But perhaps that is the genre I typically work in. If I had to guess, there probably wouldn't be a noticeable difference.
@robertdevoy3119 Жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions Yes, I believe it. I have Richard Thompson "The Old Kit Bag" that is a superb analog recording from 2003. I have it in dvd-audio 96/24 and cd 44/16. They sound identical. That is why I never buy the way overpriced "high rez" versions of anything anymore. It's just a rip off and marketing gimmick. Especially, when it's a download where you only get a digital file and nothing physical to hold and read, such as a booklet with photos and lyrics etc.
@JustinLesamiz Жыл бұрын
I bought the entire Tool catelog on hdtracks in 24/96 and played it back on an Ibasso audiophile player (with a separate DAC for each channel and it is noticeably better quality on my Shure headphones than 16/44 rips directly from the CDs. It's most noticeable in the cymbals. It sounds like you can actually hear the cymbals swinging in the air as opposed to being this flat thing. Is it necessary to enjoy the music? No, but it does increase immersion. It's not something you'd ever notice while playing the tracks back on a phone or using Airpods. So, overall, it's probably more trouble than it's worth. For Danny Carey's drumming, it was worth it for me.
@andrer4221 Жыл бұрын
Hi, you said that there might just be one possible solution to have a signal between 2 measuring or sampling points. That's hardly believable. If you have a 9kHz signal you will have 5 sampling points per period. But what is if there is an additional 18 or 20 kHz signal of very short duration. it would change this signal and the resulting signal might not be captured accurately, I guess... Hard to explain in a foreign language And: do you think it is possible to convert a 48kHz audio into 44.1 kHz audio ( or vica versa) with out a loss of quality? Or is it necessary to record in a double- target sampling rate? So 88.2 kHz for CD instead of 96kHz? Kind regards
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Digital signal processing isn't an easy thing to grasp. Assuming you sample at greater than 2x the highest frequency and the signal is band limited, it will ALWAYS be perfectly captured. Period. It's mathematically proven. If you want to go deeper, you can read some digital signal processing books that will probably have the mathematical proof. It's not intuitive, and it can take a lot of reading to finally get these concepts to click. It did for me at least 😂 Assuming a high quality resampling algorithm (which almost all DAWs have), the only noticeable difference will be the loss of frequencies above the anti aliasing filter (which is about 22khz which we can't hear). There really isn't any benefit to recording at such high sampling rates unless you want to reduce aliasing in non linear processes and plugins. If the plugins have oversampling, then it's honestly probably not worth the extra cpu unless the plug-in oversampling algorithm isn't working as expected (which can happen... I've seen it on more than 1 plugin!). Hope that helps! Cheers 🤘
@copperysinger5985 Жыл бұрын
well answer this; why does the recordings sound so much better and crystal clearer when recording in 96khz as opposed to 44khz?
@RaytownProductions 11 ай бұрын
Have you tried a blind test? It's very easy to fool yourself into hearing things that might not actually be there. Try a null test first. You can upsample the 44khz song to match the 96khz song and invert the polarity. IF it's silent, there is absolutely NO difference. Use a good resampling algo like r8brain by voxengo (free). Then do the same test by downsampling the 96 khz to match the 44 and invert the polarity. Do they null? If so, they are IDENTICAL and the differences you hear are in your mind. Also, if there is some sound during the nulltest, it needs to be pretty loud to actually hear it when the song is playing. Let me know how it goes! Thanks for the comment :)
@MichaelW.1980 2 жыл бұрын
Honestly… I would find the high sampling rates to be a complete gimmick, if it wasn’t for the time stretching. They seem to create more issues, than what they are supposed to solve. I have a MOTU M4 audio interface and even though it is my best interface in terms of signal qualities, running it at more than 48kHz extends my noise floor into ultrasonics. Try to clean that up. It will make you go nuts! By the way, the sampling rate only defines the highest possible sampling rate. The noise floor / dynamic range is defined by the bit depth, depending on the recording format. PCM WAV for example: 8 bits = 48.16dB, 16 bits = 96.33dB, 24 bits = 144dB, 32 bit = 192.66dB.
@MichaelW.1980 2 жыл бұрын
Oops! I wrote sampling rate twice there. I obviously meant, sampling rate defines the highest possible frequency to record, before aliasing occurs. And writing about the dynamic range: a noise floor of -48.16 dBFS is almost impossible to clean up. You need to destroy your audio with compression, to fit it in there not even the human voice does fit in there. Funny enough, a noise floor of -96.33 dBFS again is so low, that it makes for great releases. But for recording, having the extra low noise floor is great for dynamic range, even for the human voice. I can easily record whispering and shouting in one go. That being said, 32 bit PCM remains a gimmick, because for now, there is pretty much no audio recording equipment on the market, that has a dynamic range to surpass even the limit of a 24 bit noise floor. 32 bit float interfaces again are realized with trickery.
@chriskemp466 Жыл бұрын
I heard somewhere that it is better to create projects at higher rates because if TV/film etc want to use your music they demand higher rate. Is this the case?
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
The standard for video is 48 khz sample rate. So I would recommend that for audio as well for convenience. Hope that helps!
@chriskemp466 Жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions Thanks for taking the time to answer :)
@beatdemon1 2 жыл бұрын
There is one place where this matters more than music and that is in sampling and sample stretching. The higher the sample rate, the better the sound will stretch in a sampler, for example, Omnisphere (when you want to import a sound and then play it across the keyboard).
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
Exactly!
@drinkinslim 2 жыл бұрын
That is just one reason why it bugs me that most sound design companies sell samples at 44.1kHz. I mean that WAS the audio standard in the 2000s but we're not cutting CDs anymore and stretching across the keyboard definitely benefits from higher sample rates. :)
@JustinLesamiz Жыл бұрын
Once you're using a sampler at all, it's already clear you don't care about sound quality.
@beatdemon1 Жыл бұрын
@@JustinLesamiz WTF are you talking about? LOL.
@TheMIDIhead Жыл бұрын
@@JustinLesamiz Um, what? So you believe that those of us who use samplers use them because we don't care about sound quality? What do you suggest then when we are all limited by the technology and proliferation available? Mmmk. Good luck with that line of reasoning.
@siddantsharma3681 2 жыл бұрын
Playing a 96 khz sample rate flac file but my sound interface supportz only 44.1 , so is it useless to listen 96 or 48???
@MLWJ1993 Жыл бұрын
Useless? Maybe. It's definitely resampling though. If that sounds like an improvement to you, why not?
@levijessegonzalez3629 Жыл бұрын
what about 88.2? should I utilize that or just go with 96?
@JustinLesamiz Жыл бұрын
Whatever is comfortable for you. It's mostly going to come down to disk space and processing power.
@TheBelse 2 жыл бұрын
Soft synths sound better at 96 k for whatever reason ..i can A/B it now and hear it plain as day ..I use tempos derived from whole milliseconds ...so 48 per millescoend works for me ...easy edits with the right clock ...96 for the soft synths though. what about clusters of small frequencies high up ....it affects the pressure wave. I think Neve said his kit was capable of 100k ..and we can't hear that far up ..unless in a hypersensitive state. I prefer analog for that reason. I mix at 48 though. It's a timing thing ..not a perception thing.
@RaytownProductions 2 жыл бұрын
That's a really interesting perspective. Thanks for sharing!
@danmoore6195 2 жыл бұрын
I agree that higher rates sound better when editing, but the original, auto-tuned vocal recording was so bad, I mean, who cares about the stretching resolution? GIGO.
@laserjakk3629 Жыл бұрын
Good point, but why Audio Interfaces Offers lower latency in 192khz? If u look at the latency benchmark all brands ask you to increase the sample rate and decrease the buffer size. For an example Motu M4 offers 2.5ms roundtrip latency at 64buffer size / 192khz. If you go 64buffersize / 48.000khz the roundtrip latency ups to 4.3ms. Can you talk about it?
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Good question - I don't know the answer to this one. Need to do a little research and if I find the answer I'll come back and let you know :)
@laserjakk3629 Жыл бұрын
@@RaytownProductions thanks
@thomdabomb5067 Жыл бұрын
Most modern ADC use two stage filtering when running at 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz sample rates. When you select 48 kHz, your ADC will operate at 192 kHz internally, which allows for gentle analog Nyquist filtering. This captured 192 kHz data is then run through a steep digital linear phase filter before conversion to the desired 48 kHz output. Importantly, all linear phase filters need latency to operate. However, if you select 192 kHz, the digital linear phase filter stage is disabled, thereby removing the additional latency requirement. Of course, your ADC miles may vary.
@laserjakk3629 Жыл бұрын
@@thomdabomb5067 interesting. I'm a type of producer that use VSTs in 90% of my production via USB midi Keyboard, I record only vocals and sometimes a guitar or single instrument via audio channel. Also I am those ones that mix my songs on the flow (while produce). So, having these aspects in mind, which sample rate / bit depth/ buffer size is the best for me?
@thomdabomb5067 Жыл бұрын
@@laserjakk3629 Bit depth is easy: 24-bit for studio recording. (If you're doing field work, those fancy-schmancy 32-bit floating point recordings like the Zoom F6 are amazing!) Buffer size will depend entirely upon your setup. You'll just have to experiment and see how small you can go while still maintaining a margin of safety. Sample rate for recording (where ultrasonic frequencies are not needed) is an interesting topic. 44.1 kHz is fine for things like music streaming, but 48 kHz is used for video (although KZfaq notably recommends 44.1 kHz.) However, you'll read/hear many people claiming that 96 kHz or 192 kHz recordings sound better, especially in the high end. I'm assuming you're aware that audio reproduced through digital means is not jagged, and that sample rate is not about "resolution" but about frequency response. Does this mean that claims of 96 kHz or 192 kHz recordings sounding better is just a placebo effect? Maybe. But maybe not. As previously stated, if you're recording at 48 kHz, there's a good chance that your audio interface is running internally at 4x that rate, and then converting down to the target rate of 48 kHz. But there's no one correct way to do this, and some interfaces do it better than others. If you find that your interface captures better at 192 kHz or 176.4 kHz, then by all means use that. However, after capture, I would recommend converting those files to the more useful rates of 48 kHz or 44.1 kHz. But be aware that like audio interfaces, not all software sample rate conversion algorithms are equal. I personally recommend something that uses the latest r8brain algorithm by Aleksey Vaneev of Voxengo fame. He uses it in his plugins, and last year Reaper added it as option. (Mr. Vaneev has kindly made the source code available for all to use.) If you're not a Reaper user, you can still download its fully functional and perpetual demo. Under the "File" drop-down menu there is a "Batch File/Item Converter" option that allows you to do all sorts of conversions, including sample rate conversion. Be sure to select "r8brian free" for optimum quality!
@guycohen14 Жыл бұрын
Do you mix and master at 44.1 or 48??
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Both. Whatever the client sends me. Personally I do everything at 48/24 but that is because it's also compatible with video standards. Cheers!
@StudioTrumpeter 15 күн бұрын
I'm recording at 48Hz for now, I'll definitely try at 96
@EleTheProducer Жыл бұрын
Uso 96hz y 32bit pa grabar voces Ala hora de mexlar paso a 48hz y me exporta full
@BeatsByJarel 4 ай бұрын
Voy a tratar esta technica...te da mejor calidad?
@awesomematthews1238 Жыл бұрын
Very useful info. Curious as to why some engineers swear that 48k is way better than 44k but 96k makes little difference.
@JM_2019 Жыл бұрын
Because 48kHz moves the required high cut in the audio signal from 20,5 kHz to 24 kHz, which is in reach to the frequencies some people can hear, while 96kHz moves it from 24 kHz to 48 kHz, which is irrelevant for human hearing.
@RaytownProductions 8 ай бұрын
Workflow...
@carmelodl8407 Жыл бұрын
I wonder why oversampling isn't used for time-stretching algorithms at this point...
@RaytownProductions 8 ай бұрын
You are on to something... I talk about this in my edit like a pro course. Depending on the algo, it helps tremendously!
@bonzology322 3 ай бұрын
I record a lot of acoustic music at 96k, have for a very long time, it sounds smoother than 44.1
@jeffsims5683 Жыл бұрын
Logically I understand down sampling, but how can a already sampled recording be up sampled? Is the existing (already recorded) 44.1 sampled sound reprocessed? Isn't that logically less quality if your resampling a sound that is already a lower resolution, compared to a higher sample of a raw, unsampled recorded sound?.... I am not criticizing, I am just honestly asking.
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Typically the missing samples are "zero filled". This topic gets complicated quickly and I'm not a digital signal processing expert. From what I understand, the zero filling just extends the frequency range that the audio processing can work, among some other minor things like improve amplitude resolution. This will cause "mirrors" of the audio spectrum at higher octaves which are filtered off with a low pass filter called a reconstruction filter when down sampling back to native sample rates like 44. This up sampling won't really add back any new frequencies, it just allows a bigger frequency window for processing non linear plugins which helps to minimize any aliasing that might occur. This low pass filter is important to do, otherwise you will get lots of aliasing if you leave that higher frequency component in the audio. This is usually handled by your sample rate converter so you never have to think or worry about it. Hope that helps (any DSP engineers feel free to correct me here haha!).
@christopherstorrier5560 9 ай бұрын
32 bit 96khz should be the standard imo....your ears are influeinced with super tweeters but they don't even start till 14 - 16khz...we need the bandwidth...& for bass
@geoffstrickler 6 ай бұрын
The primary advantages of recording and/or editing at rates above 44.1kHz are: 1. The ability to properly filter frequencies above 20kHz without losing the audible frequencies in the 15k-20k range. This makes it much simpler to eliminate aliasing. 48kHz or high is usually sufficient for this if you have analog filters that cut most content above 20kHz in place. Going to 88.2k or 96k for recording makes it much easier to filter effectively. 2. You can do more accurate frequency adjustment. (Time stretching) 3. You have a marginally lower noise floor, although higher bit depth is much more effective at lowering noise floor (while also adding dynamic range)
@RaytownProductions 6 ай бұрын
Great points. I agree with everything you say here. Digital filters are REALLY good now so in my opinion it would be really hard to hear the differences between an antialias filter at 44 and 48. Thanks for the comment!
@mennims Жыл бұрын
I hear a very subtle difference in the very highs using my objective calibrated ears according to a scientific reference. Assuming there is a subtle perceivable difference, I think at least the following factors contribute to this 1. DAC quality/flaws 2. DSP algorithm flaws 3. Audio format That excludes engineering/production quality, hardware, opinion, differences in hearing perception, audio file source quality, streaming service and settings, computer/phone/amp, build quality, speaker cables, cross-over quality, and driver and cabinet quality. I think in theory 44.1khz is sufficient, however in reality a higher sample rate may objectively sound better, although it's extremely subtle. It's possible some DSP algorithms, whether it's in your amp, computer or plugins work better with higher sample rates. Perhaps inversely for others. Therefore perhaps the average person's audio setup would benefit subtly from an increase from 44.1khz. While a perfect audio setup may benefit less. I think we're not as aware of the layers involved in modern listening. It has never been this complicated with so many variables that are also abstracted away. Sure one may consider upping the quality of their streaming service, however, how many consider how their chosen streaming service compresses and delivers the audio? That's not inherently a bad thing, but more awareness could help. Perhaps that's why some people who try a well-recorded CD say it somehow sounds better - because we mostly listen through advanced digital devices with many layers, while a good CD player connected to a good amp has far less.
@contraspower6302 Жыл бұрын
If we record at 96khz can we mix at 44.1khz or 48khz??? I'm asking this coz my computer can't handle 96khz recordings?
@contraspower6302 Жыл бұрын
@MF Nickster Thanks man!!
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Yep! Just downsample to whatever your mixing session is and you will be all set.
@rushmusik Жыл бұрын
Hello. I have a huge problem. My engineer recorded my show. The mixer setting was 48 and the audio card 44,1. I have now a buzz on each track. Do you know a plug in or software able to help me? Thank you for answer.
@SantoshKumarsingh-ef9oj Жыл бұрын
Vesties indraganghi stediyam
@SantoshKumarsingh-ef9oj Жыл бұрын
Santoshkumarsingh. Add KZfaq
@SantoshKumarsingh-ef9oj Жыл бұрын
Vesties program indraganghi stediya? New Delhi in my India 🇮🇳country.
@rushmusik Жыл бұрын
@@SantoshKumarsingh-ef9oj ???
@RaytownProductions Жыл бұрын
Maybe iZotope rx? You might be able to try a demo to see if it helps
ОВР Шоу
Рет қаралды 9 МЛН
Audio Masterclass
Рет қаралды 952 М.
Hardcore Music Studio
Рет қаралды 564 М.
Звукозависть Ильи Лукашева
Рет қаралды 51 М.