The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
96k to 44k or 88 to 44k Spatial Processor Plugins
Old 25th June 2006
  #1
Lives for gear
 
pingu's Avatar
 

96k to 44k or 88 to 44k

Which downsample sounds closer to the original.


Ive heard rumours about selecting 88k if your destination is 44k.

Is there much of a difference between a downsample from 96k to 44k and 88k to 44k.

Old 25th June 2006
  #2
Lives for gear
 

no serious difference...the computer will have an easier time with 44-88 as its obviously an even multiple of it... may find the difference if any is in the dithering used....
Old 25th June 2006
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Sui_City's Avatar
 

some believe that SRCing from 96 to 44.1 allows for greater chance of mathematical error. Plus the fact that the sonic difference between 88.2 and 96 is far less than say between 88.2 and 44, I would rather go with 88.2.

Smaller files sizes, less processing, less chance of mathematical error, plenty bandwidth for higher freqs.
Old 26th June 2006
  #4
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

It really depends on the particular gear or the SRC formula.
Old 26th June 2006
  #5
Lives for gear
 
blackcatdigi's Avatar
originally posted by Nika:
"This question has all kinds of insinuations I'm not ready to address here, but there is no benefit to recording 96kS/s over 88.2kS/s (or versa visa) if the eventual sample rate is 44.1kS/s. The SRC for both is done the same way - upsample to 35GHz then downsample using applicable formulas."

See thread here:https://www.gearslutz.com/board/showt...ple#post351417


Pingu, you may want to check out the search function before you start all these threads.
Old 26th June 2006
  #6
Lives for gear
 
pingu's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackcatdigi


Pingu, you may want to check out the search function before you start all these threads.


All these threads?................................







I cant argue with the mathematics of Sampling theory.

However..... by trusting the mathematics, assumes the machinery in the equipment is perfect.
It is far from being so.


88k and 96k has proven to be sonically superior to me.

Though for the last year, i stayed at 44.1 because of the sampling theory paper.

I wish i didn't.

I'm not saying the paper is incorrect, it isn't.

The results are not perfectly aligning with the theory.

I am trying to find other guys that feel this way and are recording at higher fs and what they have found to be the differences between 88k and 96k after being down sampled to 44k.
Old 26th June 2006
  #7
Lives for gear
 
davidwilson's Avatar
 

Hey if we all used the search function we'd have nothing to talk about.

This was my responce to this question in another forum.

FWIW I have recorded at 44,88 and 96 and always found the higher sample rates (88,96)to have sounded better even after the sample rate conversion to 44.1K.

I just don't buy the argument that when bouncing down from 88 to 44 that by taking out every second sample means that the end product is going to sound the same.It doesn't according to my experience.

It's incredible how often I here this from guys who only have 44,48k capability or limited storage.

After trying all of these sample rates even 192 I am now sold at 96K.
Old 26th June 2006
  #8
Lives for gear
 
drundall's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pingu
All these threads?................................







I cant argue with the mathematics of Sampling theory.

However..... by trusting the mathematics, assumes the machinery in the equipment is perfect.
It is far from being so.


88k and 96k has proven to be sonically superior to me.

Though for the last year, i stayed at 44.1 because of the sampling theory paper.

I wish i didn't.

I'm not saying the paper is incorrect, it isn't.

The results are not perfectly aligning with the theory.

I am trying to find other guys that feel this way and are recording at higher fs and what they have found to be the differences between 88k and 96k after being down sampled to 44k.
I'm with you dude, I'm getting a new drive and going back to 96K.

I don't know where people get all this "even multiple" stuff. Guess they don't know about the upsampling...
Old 26th June 2006
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Bishbashbosh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drundall
I don't know where people get all this "even multiple" stuff. Guess they don't know about the upsampling
Bizarre to think that so many people believe that their computer is fine dealing with the millions of processes needed to playback or record multi-track audio, and yet think it's going to struggle performing a process any more complicated than dividing by two.....

Record at whatever sample rate sounds best with your converters...... or record at whatever your final rate will be..... or record at the rate which puts least stress on your system...... or record at the rate at which your favourite plugs sound best.....

I'm happy at 48kHz 24bit...... but there's no correct answer on this (unless you're recording at 192- in which case you need to get out more).....
Top Mentioned Products
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
bmsander / Music Computers
3
patheticus / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
1
not_so_new / Music Computers
8
Mount Cyanide / Music Computers
4
fross / Music Computers
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump