It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Studio: https://www.voltperoctave.com
Music: https://www.euclideancircuits.com
Me: https://www.jamesrichmond.com
So Octatonic, if I am aiming to do some videos a bit further down the line, once I have the basics of recording on Reaper, to YouTube etc, should I start with 48K or is 44.1K fine enough for reasonable videos? Plus if my Lenovo laptop has a sample rate of 44.1K &/or my older main computer has 44.1K using Window 7 on that, if I recorded at 48K would it not sound so good played back on them as they have different sample rates or doesn't it matter? As if I can recall, my old MD8 Analog recorder just had the one 44.1K sampling rate, which was the Mini Disc standard, if I'm correct.
These days it is much less of an issue, although 48khz would make the most sense if you are going to do a lot of non-linear video editing in FCP or Premiere etc.
Honestly, it is much much less of a hassle now to switch sample rates.
In the late 80's/90's when I started doing this it was a very big deal indeed.
Studio: https://www.voltperoctave.com
Music: https://www.euclideancircuits.com
Me: https://www.jamesrichmond.com
I think one of the reasons I went for working at 48k whilst mixing, was some information I saw which explained the effect some plugins have of introducing harmonic distortion, which is producing harsh overtones at higher frequency. Eq can filter these out, but at 44k the slope of the eq will effect the audible range, ie, half the rate=22k, which when filtered brings some cutoff below 20k, which may describe some of the 'less smoothness' that you mention. (Dan Worrells Fabfilter vids )
Part of the explanation, is the development itself, 44k was simply double the accepted 22k standard (nyquist), and 48k was a perceived improvement-with the availability of more powerful hardware.
Modern stuff can use 96k, or even 192k, which are doubles again, of 48k.
It is easy to just stick to 44k, which is where most source material comes in at, ie-CD or MP3, but if I am recording, I think there is a benefit to using the highest rate that is available to me--more headroom, or resolution, in my words.
I am using Reaper, which does any conversion under the hood, so I dont get to see some of the problems other users may experience, and my ears are old-so there is probably nothing audible to me, but I just like to know I am aiming for the best sound I can get, the final result is always something bounced out at 44k 16bit, or a 320 MP3, I am no expert by the way, just somebody who has had a few years experience. I always bow to greater knowledge.
cheers
andy k
I really don't hear a difference between 44.1 and 48k, even with large sessions and a lot of processing.
Maybe someone with dog ears can- but 48 year old me cannot.
I *think I can* at higher sample rates, but I've not conducted any scientific tests to prove it.
It could be a placebo.
96k seems like the sweet spot if you can afford the DSP hit, which I currently can.
Studio: https://www.voltperoctave.com
Music: https://www.euclideancircuits.com
Me: https://www.jamesrichmond.com
I choose to work at 48k, so my Reaper session has this as a default setting, sometimes stuff can mess up if different sample rates are mixed in a session (which is to be avoided). Reaper is very good at doing conversion in the background, and you have to learn to trust your ears.
I started a thread somewhere on here, where out of boredom I remixed a track and converted mp3 to various states, which is obviously a stupid thing to do--despite multiple messing about, the final result was still pretty good, not as bad as I was expecting- although my own monitoring is less than perfect, which was the point-to ask others to point out areas where it sounded degraded or bad, didn't get any response really, so I guess the topic is not that exciting.
Thanks Andy, so you need to really keep everything at the same sample rate, so just to confirm if I stay with 44.1K, when I want to add music to a video, say for Youtube, are the video sample rates also able to work at 44.1K! As somewhere along the line, when watching one of the training videos, I am sure they mentioned if you were going to put your recordings to videos at a later stage, you would really need 48K! Or can you set video sample rates to 44.1K to match the recordings, without much loss of picture quality?