Sampling rates

  • Thread starter Thread starter wheelema
  • Start date Start date
wheelema

wheelema

Boner-obo
Learned about this on GearSlutz. Rather interesting discussion here about sampling rates. To cut to the chase, larger is not neccessarily better. 48Khz is better than 44.1Khz, but 99.9% of the signal is captured at close to 60Khz. Anything past that is basically wasting storage on your HDD. To quote the author....

quoted from Dan Lavry
"192Khz is a crock! 382Khz is a super crock! 88.2/96Khz is a bit excessive, but not too far from a good rate"
Click to expand...

The author and subsequent respondents make it clear that anything past 96Khz is developed solely to provide ammo for marketing bullshit.
 
Spanky,

Your link discusses frequency (i.e., how much the human ear can hear), not sampling rates.

quoted from Loudist, italic emphasis added
It is very interesting reading on the effect of inaudable high frequency content and brainwave activity.

This studies parameters goes out to 100k (frequency not sample rate).

Could be a factor in why folks don't listen to music in their homes very much anymore as CD's start sloping off at 18k to zero at 22k.
Could help explain the trend of the flat mastering loudest wars.

I don't know... any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Sampling rates determine how much of the analog signal is captured to disk, not how much the human ear can hear.

Comparing apples to HP calculators
 
Last edited:
....interesting!!

So a sampling rate of 96Khz would provide for an audio frequency of up to 48Khz? Wouldn't that be overkill, even for dogs??
 
Well, I have done a test in Reaktor specifically dealing with aliasing arifacts. At 44.1kHz the higher notes get aliased really badly. At 96kHz things sound better, but I can still hear aliasing :eek: At 192kHz there is a hint of aliasing. At 384kHz I have to try really hard to hear any aliasing. Of course at this point the CPU utilization goes through the roof, so that's no good. Most of the time though I can deal with 88.2kHz just fine, especially after filtering. However, at higher sampling rates the audio does sound more "open", "focused" and less "murky" even at lower frequencies where you don't particularly hear metallic bell like sounds that aliasing produces.

Why all that blurb at the top about Reaktor? I think it beautifully demonstrates the benefit of higher sampling rates. AD converters get around this aliasing issue through the use of antialiasing filters. With really good AD converters the aliasing artifacts are not an issue even at 48kHz, but c'mon let's face it, how many of us here have $5000, even $2000 converters? In the end it's not about what happens to the frequencies that we can hear, it's about what happens when the frequencies that we can't hear distort/pin/wrap around against the ceiling of the sampling frequency and cause issues in the audible range.
 
Last edited:
That what' that psw thread was about was the effect of inaudible high frequencies on audible frequencies.

A lot of people talk about the sould of music being where you can't hear it. Of course CDs are 44.1 so the benefit is only at the source. I'm not sure on the rate of DVD audio though.
 
69ShadesofRed said:
Well, I have done a test in Reaktor specifically dealing with aliasing arifacts. At 44.1kHz the higher notes get aliased really badly. At 96kHz things sound better, but I can still hear aliasing :eek: At 192kHz there is a hint of aliasing. At 384kHz I have to try really hard to hear any aliasing. Of course at this point the CPU utilization goes through the roof, so that's no good. Most of the time though I can deal with 88.2kHz just fine, especially after filtering. However, at higher sampling rates the audio does sound more "open", "focused" and less "murky" even at lower frequencies where you don't particularly hear metallic bell like sounds that aliasing produces.

Why all that blurb at the top about Reaktor? I think it beautifully demonstrates the benefit of higher sampling rates. AD converters get around this aliasing issue through the use of antialiasing filters. With really good AD converters the aliasing artifacts are not an issue even at 48kHz, but c'mon let's face it, how many of us here have $5000, even $2000 converters? In the end it's not about what happens to the frequencies that we can hear, it's about what happens when the frequencies that we can't hear distort/pin/wrap around against the ceiling of the sampling frequency and cause issues in the audible range.
Click to expand...

I was just recently able to use 96kHz (upgraded my PC) and it's night and day. I would still at some point like to have an 8 tape machine on hand but there is more "feel" to it at 96kHz than at 44.1
 
Spankenstein!

Do you know where the Guitar Center clearance center is in K.C.?
 
wheelema said:
Spankenstein!

Do you know where the Guitar Center clearance center is in K.C.?
Click to expand...

Yah I go there quite often. I always get horrible service but generally only go through the broken stuff to see if there's anythign I can repair.
 
Well, you may not be able to hit the beach very easily, but having the G.C. clearance center there should help compensate!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top