| Author
|
Why you should raise your sample rate!
|
talolard
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
64
Posts :
282
Posted : Dec 2, 2006 21:23
|
Maybe everyone else here knows this and i've been behind for a while but I've just realized the importance of working with higher sample rates.
I credit my discovery to Asaf Dar, who showed us this at a workshop he gave a few weeks ago but i only tried it out today so...
anyway, i was under the impression that thier is no point in working in a sample rate higher than 44.1 since thats cd audio.
then, today i ran my virus thru an oscilliscope. i played a square wave and to my surprise i saw obvious imperfections. thier was an unneccasry "gap" between the fall and the rise which is bound to create unneccasary crap.
Now what the fuck, i thought to myself. i bought a $1500 synth and it cant make a decent square wave?
then i remembered that workshop and quickly changed my sample rate, and walla, the sqaure wave was perfect.
then i listened to my tracks at thier new sample rate, the difference was huge. sounds came thru better, and the effects. effects were much more precise.
anyway, my lesson learnt is that it doesnt matter that the cd is 44.1. all the processing your computer is doing should be at a high sample rate. dont believe me, go look at an osciliscope.
tal
  Work like you don't need the money.
Love like you've never been hurt.
Dance like nobody's watching.
natanofgaza@yahoo.com |
|
|
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Dec 2, 2006 22:39
|
|
faxinadu
Faxi Nadu / Elmooht
Started Topics :
282
Posts :
3394
Posted : Dec 3, 2006 00:08
|
asaf dar! <3 <3
the guy is king! the brain behind adern and some amazing scope plugs, and also contibuting his skills on tons of productions in israel. really respect that guy.
for scope system users... try one time to set scope on 96khz... try some of the synths now, if u have the vectron this one especially sounds amazing on 96.
The Way Back
https://faxinadu.bandcamp.com/album/the-way-back |
|
|
|
DrTiTus
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
7
Posted : Dec 3, 2006 23:21
|
And so does it matter if you only use samples?  |
|
|
|
FluoSamsara (Oxygen)
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
84
Posts :
1164
Posted : Dec 4, 2006 00:27
|
Definition will be related to the sample rate, but also on your converters...some converters can translate to 44.1 with a lot more definition than others...
Your synth did indeed cost 1500$ but your sound will be as good as the weakest link in the chain...how much you spent on your audio interface? (im not going into conclusions just thinking about this myself)
I have a firewire 410 and yes, I do notice a huge diference between 96 and 44.1, I wonder if it would be such a diference if I was using some Apogee or some high grade converters...anyone?
Boomz
|
|
|
|
Enertopia
Enertopia
Started Topics :
99
Posts :
676
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 08:21
|
IMO, when you work on a whole project at 96khz 32 bit, your cpu starts to get demanded, I got an RME 9632, supports 96khz, but it takes twice the cpu power to process, now, 48khz 32 bit, is a good option.
What do you think? |
|
|
|
illusions
Erebus
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
626
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 10:15
|
Very interesting topic. Going all the way upto 96khz might not be possible for a lot of us, but as Enertropia asked, what about going upto 48khz ?
Really going to make that much of a difference ? |
|
|
|
Trip-
IsraTrance Team
Started Topics :
101
Posts :
3239
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 11:14
|
I think working at 48khz is a hassle...
converting samples which allready 44.1khz just for those extra 4khz is unnecessary imo.
Crackling universes dive into their own neverending crackle...
AgalactiA |
|
|
|
faxinadu
Faxi Nadu / Elmooht
Started Topics :
282
Posts :
3394
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 12:40
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 13:10
|
i agree with postunder,
though i believe what you say talolard.. though i wonder why its like that.
for recording of acoustic instruments i think its more important to use a high samplerate and of course bitdepth.
though if you got a very powerful computer i think using 24/96 is great..
|
|
|
|
Djones
IsraTrance Senior Member
Started Topics :
267
Posts :
1766
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 14:29
|
|
I believe if you use higher sample rates, you retain much better quality when pitchshifting samples up and down. |
|
|
|
Trip-
IsraTrance Team
Started Topics :
101
Posts :
3239
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 15:32
|
Quote:
|
On 2006-12-05 14:29, Djones wrote:
I believe if you use higher sample rates, you retain much better quality when pitchshifting samples up and down.
|
|
Esspecially pitching down I suppose...
Crackling universes dive into their own neverending crackle...
AgalactiA |
|
|
|
Djones
IsraTrance Senior Member
Started Topics :
267
Posts :
1766
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 15:40
|
Quote:
|
On 2006-12-05 15:32, Trip- wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2006-12-05 14:29, Djones wrote:
I believe if you use higher sample rates, you retain much better quality when pitchshifting samples up and down.
|
|
Esspecially pitching down I suppose...
|
|
Exactly! |
|
|
|
Trip-
IsraTrance Team
Started Topics :
101
Posts :
3239
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 16:40
|
So the bottom line is that it's better to RECORD at 96khz or working with 96khz recorded samples in the first place.
Converting 44.1khz samples to 96khz won't bring much of a difference.
Is that the issue talolard?
Crackling universes dive into their own neverending crackle...
AgalactiA |
|
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : Dec 5, 2006 18:32
|
|
lot of plugins upsample to 96 and downsample after so you don t loose quality during processing. |
|
|
|
