what sample rate do you record at?

  • Thread starter Thread starter garbagelarge
  • Start date Start date

when the intended medium for a recording is a cd, what sample rate do you record at?

  • 44.1 b/c of cpu and hard drive space considerations, or b/c my interface only supports 44.1

    Votes: 15 8.9%

  • 44.1 b/c I prefer to mix at the same sample rate that the public will hear it at

    Votes: 35 20.8%

  • 44.1 b/c conversion process negates any benifits of recording/mixing at higher sample rates

    Votes: 34 20.2%

  • I record at 48khz

    Votes: 39 23.2%

  • I record at higher than 48khz

    Votes: 45 26.8%
  • Total voters
    168
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Well, that's a funny thing about people; they tend to see one as "well thought out and rational" when they agree with one's position, and "far from it" when they disagree with it. ;) .

G.
Click to expand...


naw...what I was commenting about acttually was quite rational. Some things you say just rely on argument for argument's sake, falling back on weak stereotypes and repeating the standard response for such arguements, whether they make sense or not. If you are referring to the thread about piracy, view my response about income tax law. It was disagreed and rationally argued, and I decided that the other fellow could be correct. There is a very cool art to debate, and even when people disagree with you, here is so much to learn... as long as they actually intellectually debate along with you. Otherwise, it's just a name calling bitch-fit.
 
Farview said:
that was a response to someone pointing out that it looked like the poll was against 44.1k. I was pointing out that you have to add all the different 44.1k questions to get the real percentage. It wasn't an endorsement, it was an observation.

The Earthshaker festival was cool. I just got done mixing David Shankle's new album. He (his band, DSG) will be playing the Magic Circle Festival on July 7 in Germany. That band is going to kill.
Click to expand...


cool dude I'll keep an eye out for it. :)

oh, didn't realize that. Cool, then. Really, I think whatever works for people is the best.. I like 24bit 96k cause it makes a difference to me. Nothing wrong with recording at 44.1... I can hear some sonic difference, but that's not what music is about anyway.
 
TerraMortim said:
what I was commenting about...
Click to expand...
There once were two monks travelling together in a heavy downpour. They came upon a beautiful woman stuck out in the rain in a fine silk dress. This woman was having trouble crossing an intersection without stepping in a deep, muddy puddle and getting her dress ruined.

"I'll help you," said one monk to the woman, and he proceeded to scoop her up in his arms and carry her across the street. The second monk protested, as they had both taken vows to never go near women under any curcumstance.

The woman thanked the first monk on the other side of the street and went inside to get warm. The two monks went on their way down the street. The first monk was nonplussed. The second monk was pretty agitated inside and kept glowering silently at the first monk.

After they walked a few blocks down the street, the second monk couldn't hold it back any further. He yelled at the first monk,"How could you DO that? You know that went against our ways. You should not have touched that woman."

The first monk simply replied, "I put the woman down several blocks ago. Why are you still carrying her?"

G.
 
I'm about to write a paper on higher sample rates, how the effect of resampling has ie is there any benefit to recording 88.2khz instead of 96khz if the end product is 44.1khz?

It's not going cover 44.1khz vs higher samples rates, nor 16- vs 24-bit. And it's funna involve a load of reading and some fairly un-inspiring graphical analysis.




Boy am I looking forward to that....sniff sniff.
 
I'm sure you'll have a blast! I mean, come on, how could it be any more fun than writing articles on samplerates? ;) Well I guess sipping a virgin martini over at the AES cruise might be more fun. Why are there cruises for every single walk of life? I wonder if there is a cruise for people who like scat sex... Imagine the entertainment on board that ship... would bring a new level of middle school jokes about the poop deck.
 
I wonder if there are cruises for people with silly hats?
 
hahaha surely there must be. I mean, there is even an Alaskan math cruise. Spend your time, while looking upon lovely ice formations and polar bears, talking about math and drinking martinis... ummm NO!! The software developers cruise...AES cruise...the self proclaimed "nerd" cruise...there is a macintosh users cruise....a microsoft users cruise...What next... the pedophile cruise? the ever so popular circle jerk cruise? The cruise for people with no arms or legs? Cruise for people who are in comas! (that would be a really lively one! Sign me up for a ticket!) Who the hell would want to go on a cruise and talk about their job lol. I certainly would just rather relax and enjoy the sights, listen to awful lounge singers singing to foxtrotting geriatrics, and sipping cocktails and listening to overpriviledged idiots try to sound "hip" to me on one hand, and put me down in a backhanded other hand.
 
Most of my recording is done in the field with a remote dedicated unit (AKAI DPS16) I'd love to record in the field at 96 kHz, but because of the reality of disk space considerations, I tend to record at 44.1 or 48 kHz, sometimes at 88.2, as it leaves me with more resources - and it's a live recording. For instance, like many units, mine will record eight channels simultaneously at 24 bit / 48 kHz, but its resources will drop to 4 channels at 96 kHz. In the project studio I usually record at 96 kHz. I always record at 24 bit resolution.

I do most post production work in Adobe Audition 2.0 which uses the highest resolution practicable and is designed to accommodate 32-bit resolution. However if you give it 24-bit to work with, it will save in 24 bit.

The Audition help page has a discussion about bit depth:

Just as sample rate determines frequency range, bit depth determines dynamic range. When a sound wave is sampled, each sample is assigned the amplitude value closest to the original wave’s amplitude. Higher bit depth provides more possible amplitude values, producing greater dynamic range, a lower noise floor, and higher fidelity:

16-bit = CD quality = 65,536 amplitude value = 96 dB dynamic range.
24-bit = DVD quality = 16,777,216 amplitude value = 144 dB dynamic range.
32-bit = best quality = 4,294,967,296 amplitude value = 192 dB dynamic range.

What all this means to me is that my sound will be the best I can make it, if it is recorded, mixed and mastered at the highest bit depth and sampling rates my equipment can deliver. The very last step in that process is the conversion to 16/44.1 for copying to a CD (or worse - .mp3. ugh).

That way I maintain the best possible sound quality throughout, working with the largest data set my gear is able to generate. If I start with 16 bit resolution or with a low sampling rate, then moving it to higher grade somewhere down the line just isn't going to help much, as I'll just get a better picture of a poor sample.
 
I record at infinity kHz, as my music is too gosh darn swell to settle for less!
 
Treeline said:
32-bit = best quality = 4,294,967,296 amplitude value = 192 dB dynamic range.
Click to expand...
I've never seen 32 bit fixed (what you described above) Most Daws use 32 bit floating point math, that gives you upwards of 1500db of dynamic range. Of course there is no such thing as a 32 bit converter, so you are only capturing 24 bits. It just does the processing at 32 bit float so all the errors are shoved way down below the noise floor of the final product.
 
mmmmm......'elevated sampling'......

I heard David Briggs use this term recently at an engineering course, and thought I'd share it with you.

I guess it was in the way he said it, you had to be there.

I finally made the biggest SQ jump I've ever made, by going backwards....back to 44.1
 
I record with a 92kHz bit rating, & 24 bit depth. I always make sure to free up my diskspace first though before I begin on a project.

I've heard that it's a good idea to record on an 88kHz sampling rate but I haven't tried it yet. Not sure why it's not working with my ProTools LE setup at home.
 
Apparently just writing "2.8mHz" was too short a message to be approved by the moderators... Hmm, perhaps I should have tried "two point eight freakin megahertz, muthafukkaz!" and seen if that would pass muster.
 
24 Bit/192Khz baby!!! :D

i love my sound card.




i feel maybe i was a bit late posting in this thread lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top