| Author
|
Bass frequency power shifts...
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Feb 8, 2007 19:27
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-02-08 18:28, UnderTow wrote:
Chicken!
UnderTow
|
|
wow... such an act of bravery considering the distance between us and the fact that you're hiding behind false flag. I'm truly amazed and impressed 
@ illusions: It was about time... I was starting to think that you'll never get the picture 
  "It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
l337
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
55
Posts :
817
Posted : Feb 8, 2007 22:32
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-02-08 16:37, shamantrixx wrote:
Many people even don't hear the difference between mp3 in 128, 256 and 320 kbps...
|
|
its quite easy to hear the difference between 128 and 320... anybody who does a blind test with reasonable ears would be able to point out the 320 kbps mp3
but thats besides the point i guess... |
|
|
|
Yunick
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
17
Posted : Feb 9, 2007 14:29
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-02-02 02:20, shamantrixx wrote:
It's due to the sample rate of your soundcard and the standard equal temperament tuning. Try to switch samplerate to 48kHz and tune down your instruments to 423 Hz instead of 440 Hz. You'll be amazed with the clarity of sound.
From the scientific point of view such problems with bass sounds (and others) are caused by the "rounding" errors during the sampling process in the soundcard. If you have a bass line playing in the key of C (let's say a 130,81 Hz) your soundcard is processing this frequency trough 44100 samples (fixed mathematical points) per second. So since we have a bass line with 130,81 cycles per second and 44100 points per second we get that each bass cycle has to be calculated within 337,13018882348444308539102515098 fixed frames. Obviously soundcard will process this as a 338 samples and next bass line cycle will start in 338th sample and that is like 0,8698111765155569146089748491 samples later. Since Soundcard can't really delay the cycle it will simply ignore this difference and new cycle will not start from zero crossing but will have a missing part or a kind of phase delay if you like.
If you retune the C note to 128 Hz and calculate it within 48000 fixed points you get a clean 375 samples for each cycle. Further on... if you use Phytagorian (or similar non equal) temperament all other notes will be coherent with the note C and you'll have far less rounding errors, phase distortion and most certainly less problems with altering power when altering pitch.
Keep in mind that everything in nature is coherent with whole numbers. All life starts as a single cell and than divides in 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128 cells etc. In nature there is no such thing as 337,13018882348444308539102515098. It's 337 or it is 338. Speakers also can not play 337,13 sound frames... they play 337 or 338 cycles. Everything in between is lost, damaged and makes various strange anomalies. Those anomalies when run trough effects, EQ's and other plugs get miscalculated for many times before you finish the track. Less errors in the start - better sound in the end.
|
|
Well bro, I changed the samplerate to 48.000hz, but im in doubt how to change the temperament 440hz to 423hz, in reason there are a option to change just the Cents, do u know how can a change 400 to 423?
I read in another topics ppl talking about that but to change to 432 instead 440,
what do u think about that?
|
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Feb 9, 2007 17:19
|
Sorry for the confusion m8... 432 is the correct tune. I've made a mistake while typing.
You have (at least) 2 easy ways to re-tune
1) you can simply lower synth tuning for minus 31 cent.
2) in cubase midi track insert midi plug called microtuner. For each of 12 keys you have a field with tuning in cents. So enter (-31) cents in each field and remember to save a preset for later use. KEEP IN MIND that microtuner is using pitchband for corrections and the pitchband range on the synth MUST be set to +/- 1. In other words, when you push pitchwheel all the way up it should lift the pitch for 1 tone and 1 tone down when you push it all the way down.
Some synths (like G-media Oddisey) have a fixed pitchband set to +/- 2 tones. In cases like that you have to set microtuner to (-15) or (-16) cents.
Synths like NI Massive & FM8 or Lin Plug Octopuss have a master tune that does not change when you brows trough presets. Sonicharge MicroTonic is an excelent synth drum that allows you to tune your percussions with extreme accuracy.
I hope this helps a bit.
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Feb 9, 2007 18:40
|
|
shamantrixx, what would happen if i record analog equipment? then suddenly of your theory goes to the trash can....
|
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Feb 9, 2007 20:11
|
Browse the web sites of some pro studios where they record live instruments, drums voice etc. and pay attention to what kind of AD converters they use and what sample rate are they. You'll find that most of them use pro tools AD converters working on 192 kHz that cost a small fortune. So that should give you the idea about how much difference sample rate makes when you record analog signal into the digital system.
If you know any sound technician that use to work in some studio in times before digital boom you try to ask him what sample rate used to be standard in those times. Or simply take a look at the older studio equipment. You'll see that 48 kHz was the ONLY standard until the industry has forced 44,1 kHz audio CD standard.
Anyway... to cut the crap, read this interview with member of AAS crew and what he has to say about sample rate. Could be quite revealing for some of you. Each time he mentions sample rate of studio he's talking about 48 kHz. He also mentions CD standard to be 44,1 but when speaking about studio it's always 48.
http://www.applied-acoustics.com/techtalk2.htm
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Feb 9, 2007 22:27
|
With respect, he uses the word 'studio' exactly twice in that article and the only time he uses it to recommend anything is when he's talking about dynamic range, which is a bit-depth issue, not a sample-rate issue. Nowhere in that article does he say anything like "use 48Khz sampling rate in the studio" - in fact when he discusses these things he prefixes it with "For example:" and never even implies this is what he recommends. As the article says:
Quote:
|
AAS said:
As the human ear can not perceive audio signals above 22kHz, if you want to exactly reproduce all the frequencies below 22kHz, you have to use a sampling rate two times greater, which yields 44kHz... This is why standard CD quality (44.100 kHz, 16 bit) is supposed to be enough to perfectly reproduce any piece of music. |
|
As for the history of digital audio, for a more accurate description of why 44.1KHz was the sample-rate of choice of the first digital audio systems, here's a quote from the Amek website (highly-respected manufacturers of high-end analog and digital studio equipment):
Quote:
|
Amek says:
Some of the earliest digital audio systems were used for "sound in syncs" systems at twice line frequency (i.e. 31.25 kHz.). 32 kHz was later chosen by the EBU as giving a 15 kHz bandwidth (matching the normal broadcast band) whilst being relatively low to keep down the bandwidth required for the digital signals.
44.1 kHz sampling was chosen as early digital recording systems used PCM adapters to convert analogue audio to signals that could be recorded on video tape. The sample frequency therefore had to relate to a frequency common to both 625 and 525 line video systems.
In 625 line 25 Hz (PAL) systems the line frequency is 15.625 kHz and 588 out of the 625 lines are "active" for carrying video information. If three samples are recorded per line the sample rate is
15.625 x 588/625 x 3 = 44.1 kHz.
In 525 line 30 Hz systems the line frequency is 15.75 kHz and 490 out of the 525 lines are "active" for carrying video information. If three samples are recorded per line the sample rate is
15.75 x 490/525 x 3 = 44.1 kHz. |
|
http://www.amek.com/oldsite/datashee/aesebu.htm
As for 192KHz, well as the guy at AAS himself says,
Quote:
|
AAS wrote:
I suspect that sound quality is not the only reason for changing the formats |
|
It's a money thing. I have spoken to a few current and ex-professional freelance studio engineers and have been told more than once that commercial studios feel they have to keep buying the latest technology so that their clients feel confident that they're getting the best results possible and keep booking time there - whether or not that technology actually makes any difference to the absolute quality of the results. And that we can fool our ears into hearing differences in quality that just aren't there is a given.
Finally:
Quote:
|
AAS wrote:
As a conclusion, if you want to have good results, the best advice is to only use high quality components, and whenever possible, avoid bit depth, and especially sampling rate conversion. |
|
The fact is, given that almost all music is distributed at 44.1KHz, your music will sound better if you record it at 44.1K in the first place than if you record at 48K and convert to 44.1 later on. Mastering - http://mastering.OOOD.net :: www.is.gd/mastering
OOOD 5th album 'You Think You Are' - www.is.gd/tobuyoood :: www.OOOD.net
www.facebook.com/OOOD.music :: www.soundcloud.com/oood
Contact for bookings/mastering - colin@oood.net |
|
|
|
Meta
Meta/Boomslang
Started Topics :
24
Posts :
1045
Posted : Feb 9, 2007 23:53
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-02-09 22:27, Colin OOOD wrote:
The fact is, given that almost all music is distributed at 44.1KHz, your music will sound better if you record it at 44.1K in the first place than if you record at 48K and convert to 44.1 later on.
|
|
I've also seen an... unfortunate situation where someone turned in a 48kHz song to be mastered, and the mastering engineer didn't notice. Since it was the last track on the CD, he just assumed it was a slower song...
No one noticed. The CD went to press and everything.
http://soundcloud.com/aeon604
http://www.metaekstasis.com/
http://the1134.com/ |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Feb 10, 2007 16:28
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-02-09 20:11, shamantrixx wrote:
Browse the web sites of some pro studios where they record live instruments, drums voice etc. and pay attention to what kind of AD converters they use and what sample rate are they. You'll find that most of them use pro tools AD converters working on 192 kHz that cost a small fortune.
|
|
First up, high-end studios don't use the Digidesign converters as there are much better ones available. Also, I don't know any studio that actually records at 192Khz. Most work at 44.1 or 48 for video/DVD stuff.
Quote:
|
So that should give you the idea about how much difference sample rate makes when you record analog signal into the digital system.
|
|
Why because some studios mention they have a 192 I/O from Digidesign? You can't make that conclusion based on that.
Quote:
|
If you know any sound technician that use to work in some studio in times before digital boom you try to ask him what sample rate used to be standard in those times. Or simply take a look at the older studio equipment. You'll see that 48 kHz was the ONLY standard until the industry has forced 44,1 kHz audio CD standard.
|
|
Rubbish.
Quote:
|
Anyway... to cut the crap, read this interview with member of AAS crew and what he has to say about sample rate. Could be quite revealing for some of you. Each time he mentions sample rate of studio he's talking about 48 kHz. He also mentions CD standard to be 44,1 but when speaking about studio it's always 48.
http://www.applied-acoustics.com/techtalk2.htm
|
|
Colin has allready adressed a few points but I would like to add that there are some mistakes in that article. The main error is that it keeps saying that higher sample rates are more "accurate" or "higher resolution" which isn't correct. The bandwidth is increased. Not the resolution!
But the author also write the following: "But I don't think that it is wise to use a simplified algorithm ansd simply increase the sampling rate to hide it's artifacts, I prefer to make synths which generate as few artifacts as possible even at low sampling rates."
Which is basicly the same comment I wrote earlier. Next time you post a link to an article, try reading it first.
UnderTow
|
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Feb 10, 2007 16:47
|
We all see what we want to see. That's obvious. He crystal clear when it comes to the working sample rate. Not one time he mentions working in 44,1. It's obvious that he assumes 48 kHz to be standard.
When you record analog sound you just have to preserve the information. When VST calculates the sound it's different. More calculations per second - smoother the sound will be. Same as with the digital pictures. Bit depth provides more colour variations and resolution provides greater sharpness and detail.
For that matter digital sound and picture are no different.
But if you can't hear it... that's something completely different.
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Feb 10, 2007 17:36
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-02-10 16:47, shamantrixx wrote:
We all see what we want to see. That's obvious. |
|
That is abundantly clear from reading your posts.
Quote:
| He [is] crystal clear when it comes to the working sample rate. Not one time he mentions working in 44,1. It's obvious that he assumes 48 kHz to be standard. |
|
Please quote the part where he 'assumes' anything? No, don't worry, I'll do it for you. If you actually read the article, you will see that when he is asked:
Quote:
|
So how do we determine which sampling rate to use and which bit depth? |
|
...his answer starts with a description of the range of human hearing and ends with the words:
Quote:
|
This is why standard CD quality (44.100 kHz, 16 bit) is supposed to be enough to perfectly reproduce any piece of music. |
|
As for the actual recording of music (as opposed to its reproduction), in his answer to the next question he says it even more clearly:
Quote:
|
AAS wrote:
Based on what I've said above, it should be obvious that 44100kHz... should be enough for recording or playing back digital audio in a majority of applications, as only truly professional gear is able to really achieve... a frequency response wider than DC to 22 kHz. |
|
I would hazard a guess that none of us non-millionaires here have make music on equipment capable of accurately reproducing frequencies outside the range of human hearing - or have rooms, monitoring systems or microphones capable of recording them anyway, and so any benefits obtained through using higher sample-rates are cancelled out, as he says, by the subsequent sample-rate conversion necessary to make a playable CD from a 48K audio file.
To me this says he is suggesting that 44.1KHz is adequate for our needs, and certainly none of the psytrance or folk/jazz/rock fusion albums I've released in the last 12 years have been criticised for their lack of high-frequency extension.
Shamantrixx - people use this section to find help with technical questions and problems. Your posts give incorrect and muddled information and serve only to confuse people and distract them from the task at hand, and in some cases (such as Yunick, above, unless he was being sarcastic which I don't totally discount) lead them further away from the solution to their problems. Whilst I would defend your right to free speech, I would suggest that this section of Isratrance (and similar sections of other forums) are not the appropriate places for you to to be writing these things. Perhaps you should make your own website?
You obviously have a good knowledge of SX but your technical knowledge of audio is clouded by a misguided application of pseudo-spiritual misapprehension... it's not necessary for a waveform to have a data point on every zero-crossing for it to be reproduced accurately - that's not how audio works!
Mastering - http://mastering.OOOD.net :: www.is.gd/mastering
OOOD 5th album 'You Think You Are' - www.is.gd/tobuyoood :: www.OOOD.net
www.facebook.com/OOOD.music :: www.soundcloud.com/oood
Contact for bookings/mastering - colin@oood.net |
|
|
|
energytick
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
52
Posted : Feb 10, 2007 20:01
|
This is very interesting topic, i heard about production in higher sample-rate beeing better sound , but i always wandered what happend to this quality when converting to 44.1 khz...
does the dither process have anything to do with it? could someone explain this ?
|
|
|
|
Meta
Meta/Boomslang
Started Topics :
24
Posts :
1045
Posted : Feb 11, 2007 03:29
|
|
Seppa
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
485
Posted : Feb 14, 2007 15:33
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-02-08 19:27, shamantrixx wrote:
wow... such an act of bravery considering the distance between us and the fact that you're hiding behind false flag. I'm truly amazed and impressed
|
|
I hate to take the bullies side but in this case I can't agree with you . A false flag ??!! What the hell does that mean. I'm pro Eu and I tell you something I can't wait the for the day the whole eu will become a big fat contry with a multitude of cultures and mix, I' m myself french-italian. so please !!!! In fact fuck it I'm switching flag!!! |
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Feb 14, 2007 16:51
|
Quote:
| I hate to take the bullies side but in this case I can't agree with you . A false flag ??!! What the hell does that mean. |
|
Chill out! It's a metaphor! It has nothing to do with the flag it self.
Quote:
| I'm pro Eu and I tell you something I can't wait the for the day the whole eu will become a big fat contry with a multitude of cultures and mix |
|
I also don't mind dissolving boundaries. Cultures should also be dissolved and deserted - not mixed! But EU has nothing to do with that. It's all about control.
Beside that... I've never seen any political initiative that made people benefit from it. The word "government" alone describes the nature of the agenda. Word derived from Greek language combining words "govern" - "to steer" or "to control" & "mente" - "mind" or "intellect". So it's quite straight forward and self explanatory once you do the translation.
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
|
