Øyvind Skald Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 I have seen this video a couple of times. And to be honest I have Dream Theaters self-titled in 96/24 flac files and I cannot hear any different with the CD. But this guy did hear “better sound” in his DAW without knowing why. I don’t know really. I just want to hear what you thing about this so I can get a broader view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leadfoot Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Personally 24/96 is the highest that I go. Any higher than that is too taxing on my system and takes up too much space on my hard drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InstrEd Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Yep 24/96 highest I would go to. I'm almost always at 24/44.1 - Good enough for my needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royal Yaksman Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 I don't think tracking audio higher than 44.1 gives any audible differences worth chewing memory up. The differences at 96 or higher are mostly in synths that benefit from oversampling. Craig did a good article on it a ways back: https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/sonar-upsampling-plug-ins I personally think audio people need to stop wasting time when they hear minor differences over expensive speaker systems in properly measured studios. Why?... Because normal people aren't listening on speakers like that. That teenzy bit of extra high end detail isn't going to be heard by 99.99999999999999999% of people, so it's like peeing into the wind and thinking you're responsible for creating rain. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSteven Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 From what I've read 96k can bring out the best in some soft synths, think it has to do with reducing aliasing. but some audio interfaces are far from flat at 96k (compared to lower resolutions) it eats a lot more disk space. and I'm not going to hear a difference for acoustic tracks - my ears don't hear 20k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tapsa Kuusniemi Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 I think this really matter only when you work with sound design. When you change sounds heavily the more information you have to manipulate matters. For most other things 48khz is quite enough. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synkrotron Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 24/44.1 but wtf do I know... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Flannagin Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 24/44.1 here too. All that technology and effort to produce the most pristine sound possible, and the end user pulls out their $19.99 earbuds and listens to the stream on Soundcloud. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tapsa Kuusniemi Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 22 minutes ago, pwalpwal said: yeah but they're listening to the the master encoded to mp3/whatever, so pre-encoding should be as hi-res as possible, and avoid transcoding... having said that, we've always listened to, for example, abbey road mastered stuff on our cheap hi-fi's, so what's the difference really? that's why we check the final version on multiple systems But the MP3 would sound so much better on vinyl. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-53mph Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 It really depends on how pro you are. I make music on a laptop in my house with microphones that cost under €100. Will recording at over 44 make the blindest bit of difference? Not if my room is not treated, my guitar is not top grade, and quite frankly my playing is not the best. If I was working in a studio with top grade equipment, balanced audio, peerless mics, and amazing musicians...yes, it might well be worth it, to capture all the delicate details of the session. If you're working in the box with synths etc. It won't make a difference if you start the project at 44, because, as long as there is no wav data, you can switch up later. As long as it's MIDI, it doesn't matter. The issue comes with recording and bouncing tracks. Ultimately, your audio will only be as good as the source, no matter the sample rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Argo Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 I'm always under assumption, your age determines your sampling rate.... The younger you are, the higher sampling rate you'll record with. Those over 35yo will stick with whatever your interface telling you as default... Am I right? ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-53mph Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 5 minutes ago, James Argo said: I'm always under assumption, your age determines your sampling rate.... The younger you are, the higher sampling rate you'll record with. Those over 35yo will stick with whatever your interface telling you as default... Am I right? ? Cheeky! ? ...and wrong. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royal Yaksman Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 The funny thing with this kind of stuff is whenever an individual is administering their own tests, they say it's blind and then somehow wind up (mostly) accurately picking a difference. Yet when the tests are administered by a 3rd party and are truly blind. They somehow fail miserably, or pick a difference one day only to be fooled on another day with a similar actual blind test. This is codswallop in its yawningest form. I thought about ending it there but for those wondering why I consider this the yawningest? I consider it such because even the people who say that it is better to have the highest quality before it is mixed to mp3 are off base. As the only frequencies that are going to be effected by the oversampling are frequencies that cannot be played back in high quality by the POS listening devices that the end user is going to be using. But please by all means impress your audio buddies with your 1TB project file.? Which actually begs a question! Do these people try to share projects? "Yo dude I just sent you a link to my drop box, you're going to need to start downloading this morning if you hope to start adding to it this afternoon..." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Tubbs Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 I’ve stuck w/ 22/44 since the time rate conversion could choke a computer. Never heard a difference, even after many pros went to 96 simply because they could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royal Yaksman Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 42 minutes ago, pwalpwal said: mixing in your daw of choice, the more accurate the maths (ie, higher resolution) the more accurate your output will be, it's not an opinion, it's science And when the human ear cannot accurately hear that difference it's called what exactly? I have tried tracking at higher resolutions and at no point was I amazed by this accuracy or science that you speak of. The only things with audible differences are synths and fx that benefit by the higher resolution. Which comes down to how they were coded. Tracking audio at higher resolution isn't science, it's a waste of disc space. Upsampling plugs on render however is a different discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Øyvind Skald Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 This is the other side... Rick Beato : "In this video, we explore the differences between MP3s, WAV, FLAC (lossless), AAC and whether you can tell the difference? or if it even matters? Discussion on mixing, listening, monitors and audion file formats." I bet she in this test, has better ears than most of us. In my mind i think that a "great/max ludness" mix can handle mp3 much better han more live mixes with more dynamic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royal Yaksman Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 7 minutes ago, pwalpwal said: which human ear are you using? Only ones that are prone to confirmation bias and can hear the difference between DAWs of course. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Øyvind Skald Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 23 minutes ago, Royal Yaksman said: And when the human ear cannot accurately hear that difference it's called what exactly? I have tried tracking at higher resolutions and at no point was I amazed by this accuracy or science that you speak of. The only things with audible differences are synths and fx that benefit by the higher resolution. Which comes down to how they were coded. Tracking audio at higher resolution isn't science, it's a waste of disc space. Upsampling plugs on render however is a different discussion. Cakewalk and every other VST DAWs do oversample softsynths and FXs, don't they? Or how is this really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royal Yaksman Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 minute ago, ØSkald said: Cakewalk and every other VST DAWs do oversample softsynths and FXs, don't they? Or how is this really? They don't by default. But you can select it. What I am talking about is dry audio recording. I can't hear a difference there. Sure add some plugs that benefit from upsampling and that changes, but tracking dry audio? I'm not convinced. This is where confusion lies. People listen to 2 mixes, mixed at different resolutions and the mixes involve plugs. Of course they hear a difference. But what has that got to do with the dry audio? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royal Yaksman Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, pwalpwal said: doesn't matter which daw you use, maths is maths I was being sarcastic. Maths can also be a complete waste of time, depending on the circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now