| Author
|
is is enough??
|
jhanna
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
178
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 18:48
|
is recording at 24 bits 48 hz enough fo professional audio... simple question?
thanx |
|
|
Toxical(rotem)
Toxical
Started Topics :
24
Posts :
448
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 18:56
|
|
jhanna
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
178
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 21:06
|
|
ok thanx just had that little doubt cause i heard something about cubase and 32 bit floating some kinda stuff..didnt really understand but 24 sounds good to me... |
|
|
|
six
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
4
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 21:28
|
48 hz may be a bit low, but I guess 48 Khz is ok 
 badger badger badger badger mUSHROOM MUSHROOM |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 23:32
|
if you intend to release the music on cd it might be better to work in 44.1khz ,.
greets.,
aka., |
|
|
|
Sektor666
Offtopic posts:
12
Posted: Aug 10, 2004
|
no way , the higher Bit Depth and Sample Rate will make my music kick ass !!!!
hhhhhhhhhhhh , i love you guys !!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
MoDu
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
36
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 03:52
|
If you sample your song's at double your higher frequency (normally 22 kHz), you won't loose any quality(niquyst's theory on sampling). If you intend to post process or do anything with it, maybe it wouldn't hurt to sample at a higher frequency, such as 96 kHz (wich is more than enought really).
|
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 14:43
|
" no way , the higher Bit Depth and Sample Rate will make my music kick ass !!!! "
the only exception is when you have to go from 48khz samplingrate to 44.1khz.,
if you want to use a higher samplingrate then you should use 96 .,
greets.,
aka., |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 14:51
|
There is no point using 48khz.
Your music will eventually be 44.1, be it cd or mp3 or whatever.
Resampling 48 to 44.1 may be worser than working with 44.1 in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Sektor666
Inactive User
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
439
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 15:05
|
From what i know if you work on higher sample and bit rate and then convert it to lower sample rate the quality of this part will be better that part that done at lower from beggining sampler and bit rate .
But i do argee with Mike and all others that there is no reason to work on such high rate because in the end you don't need it to make your music sound well ................
Zildoggo it was a joke .......... |
|
|
|
jhanna
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
178
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 16:42
|
Quote:
|
Resampling 48 to 44.1 may be worser than working with 44.1 in the first place.
|
|
ok, could u explain these point please i am a bit confused, will working on 48 khz can be a problem: as for cpu or the overall sound?? |
|
|
|
six
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
4
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 16:56
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-08-10 16:42, jhanna wrote:
ok, could u explain these point please i am a bit confused, will working on 48 khz can be a problem: as for cpu or the overall sound??
|
|
Not much a CPU problem, but every time you resample at a different (and not perfect multiple of the original) frequency, you are loosing information by the way of rounding errors and extrapolation artefacts ...
The quality of the resampled material depends a lot on the used algorithms, and some tend to be a lot more destructive than others ...
peace ...
badger badger badger badger mUSHROOM MUSHROOM |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 17:12
|
"From what i know if you work on higher sample and bit rate and then convert it to lower sample rate the quality of this part will be better that part that done at lower from beggining sampler and bit rate ."
this is only true if the difference between sampling rates is big enough (lets say more than 2x because of the nyquist theory)
it's a long story about interpolation, interference , phase and resampling.,.,
it basically means that converting from one sampling frequency to another that is close to the original (like from 48 to 44.1) will have comb-filter like behaviour in the higher frequencies
(and those are the ones that you try to protect by using 48khz in the first place!)
soundblaster cards often have this problem.,
internaly they work at 48khz.,
but you can also work in 44.1.,
BUT internaly this is always upsampled to 48khz., (the d-a convertors are fixed at 48khz)
the result is that you have some dips in the spectrum in the high frequencies., always.,
so, actually, if you're working on a modern soundblaster card then you should work in 48khz!!!
and leave the conversion for the mastering stage.,
i is better than working in 44.1 and letting the card convert it on the fly,
with higher samplingrates (more than twice your intended samplingrate) you can reconstruct the lower samplerates wihout artefacts.,
so going from 96khz to 44.1 can actually improve the 44.1 final compared to working in 44.1 alone
so that makes sense to use.,
but in any case, leave ALL resampling to mastering studio's.,., they usually have the best tools for that .,
about bit depth, you can safely use a higher bit depth (like 24)., it will actually help with converting sample rate.,every bit helps.,
about cpu.,
you should decide for yourself if your computer can handle higher bit depths and sample rates.,
but if you want to work at 48khz then it's better (soundwise) to work in 44.1 (unless you have a soundblaster card)
greets.,
aka.,
|
|
|
|
Sektor666
Inactive User
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
439
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 17:39
|
Thanks , Zildoggo ........ always though that pro sound cards have good sampler codecs .
just to add here 48khz sample rate not means that you take 22khz samples and resample them to 48khz but it means that you record hardware that have 48khz proccesing , analogue form of sound or sample which recorded at 48khz from other source .
|
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Aug 11, 2004 02:26
|
Then record it at 44.1.
The output is gonna be 44.1 anyway, so why bother with 48?
Most of your samples are 44.1 anyway. Why mix? It makes it all worse.
24/44.1 is the way to go.
|
|
|
|
