The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Why does everyone want 96khz ?
Old 5 days ago
  #421
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Ironically, I'm sure more than 99% of film scores are recorded at 96khz.
Certainly, every major studio session I've done for the last ten years has been run at 96khz.
Actually no!

From a year or two back, one of my buddies who was one of the Abbey Road staffers:

“I think the real hi-res stuff is mainly classical audiophile releases, very little of that at AR at the mo. DSD, 192 etc,
Most films are still final mixing at 48k, so consequently many scores are recorded at 48k. Maybe a third at 96k now.”

I rarely see 96k sessions - but then I’m mainly doing rock and pop.

I would run out of processing power, track count and UAD plugs if I ran 96k!
Old 5 days ago
  #422
Gear Guru
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Funk View Post
Although HD in the US is 24fps right? NTSC was 29.97 but that is a thing of the past.
24fps was the standard for film.

The UK went for 25fps for video as the mains frequency is 50Hz.
Old 5 days ago
  #423
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
No, phasing between the FM modulated NTSC and sound signals for broadcast is the problem.

Alistair
Well, apparently the color signal interfered with both the BW signal and the audio signal. It basically screwed up the 'old' signal. I read a piece by one of the engineers working on it but i remember them talking about interference with the tv lines. Every second line had a different position and you got these comb artefacts.
Old 5 days ago
  #424
this is becoming one of those infinity threads ... no one is right and no one is wrong .. this is the problem these days with so many choices.. we are no longer forced to just use what we have and make great art..now it's your ears against mine, against math, against science, against ego, processing power, delivery .. I will once again shut my laptop after reading all this and go to work (studio) ..and work at 24/96 today.. I will not feel bad about it .. if I feel the need to change, It will throw a wrench in all my projects as bouncing between sample rates always locks up my machine and then 2 or 3 restarts.. change in I/O etc.. it's really not worth it to me..especially when i feel good about the final..and so do my clients
Old 5 days ago
  #425
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
24fps was the standard for film.

The UK went for 25fps for video as the mains frequency is 50Hz.
That’s right but today all TV is HD or 4K and the US use 24fps and the UK 25fps but either format can be played in either side of the pond and elsewhere. As a TV editor, I for one was happy to see 29.97 (drop and non drop) disappear.
Old 5 days ago
  #426
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
In what way did movie audio quality not improve?
speech intelligibility, overall level/loudness, cheesy string samples, over-use of ambi/efx, detracting 'immersive' formats, downmixing etc.
Old 5 days ago
  #427
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
speech intelligibility, overall level/loudness, cheesy string samples, over-use of ambi/efx, detracting 'immersive' formats
Well I think the above is pretty much all a matter of aesthetic choices made which is maybe what your point was to begin with.

Another way to look at it though is that while you might feel that a lot of movies you see aren't any better than what we saw decades ago we do have more movies of the same quality. I think that's only possible because of improvements in technology. So in a way it's a struggle between the best productions made on the one side and cutting costs as well as just having more content produced (with lesser budgets regardless of profit) on the other.

On the one hand I agree that it's hard to top films like "Apocalypse Now", but on the other films like Gravity sounded absolutely excellent in my opinion.
Old 5 days ago
  #428
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Well I think the above is pretty much all a matter of aesthetic choices made which is maybe what your point was to begin with.

Another way to look at it though is that while you might feel that a lot of movies you see aren't any better than what we saw decades ago we do have more movies of the same quality. I think that's only possible because of improvements in technology. So in a way it's a struggle between the best productions made on the one side and cutting costs as well as just having more content produced (with lesser budgets regardless of profit) on the other.

On the one hand I agree that it's hard to top films like "Apocalypse Now", but on the other films like Gravity sounded absolutely excellent in my opinion.

'apocalypse now' is 40 years old! - i'm not saying that there haven't been any newer films which sound well (such as 'gravity' or which ever one likes) but imo they are sparse, in spite of better technology...

(but yeah, my point is mostly about artistic/aesthetic choices so mostly irrelevant to the topic - sorry folks! appreciate the technical expertise of some contributors a lot!)
Old 5 days ago
  #429
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
'apocalypse now' is 40 years old!
Yep, and it sounds great. The aesthetic choices in that film are absolutely excellent in my opinion. Objective sound quality is probably not as good as today, but I have a hard time coming up with examples of movies where the mix works as effectively as 'Apocalypse'. It's just great.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
- i'm not saying that there haven't been any newer films which sound well (such as 'gravity' or which ever one likes) but imo they are sparse, in spite of better technology...
Could also be that we're consuming more 'average' films because of the supply, rather than be more picky about the films we end up watching. We had less choices even just a few decades ago.
Old 5 days ago
  #430
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Yep, and it sounds great. The aesthetic choices in that film are absolutely excellent in my opinion. Objective sound quality is probably not as good as today, but I have a hard time coming up with examples of movies where the mix works as effectively as 'Apocalypse'. It's just great.



Could also be that we're consuming more 'average' films because of the supply, rather than be more picky about the films we end up watching. We had less choices even just a few decades ago.
Survivor Bias too. If you check what films came out in the same month as Apocalypse Now I bet the huge majority of them were awful.
Old 5 days ago
  #431
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soldat View Post
Survivor Bias too. If you check what films came out in the same month as Apocalypse Now I bet the huge majority of them were awful.
While that's certainly true in terms of remembering films fondly or them being commercially successful I don't think it applies in this case. 'Apocalypse' really is a pretty outstanding piece of art, sound included.
Old 5 days ago
  #432
Lives for gear
 
12tone's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Yep, and it sounds great. The aesthetic choices in that film are absolutely excellent in my opinion. Objective sound quality is probably not as good as today, but I have a hard time coming up with examples of movies where the mix works as effectively as 'Apocalypse'. It's just great.
Eraserhead?

Another FFC flick, Rumble Fish sounded incredible.
Old 5 days ago
  #433
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12tone View Post
Eraserhead?

Another FFC flick, Rumble Fish sounded incredible.
Sad to say I don't recall having seen either. On my list now.
Old 5 days ago
  #434
Gear Guru
Ummm 29.97 has not disappeared in video FWIW..... Don't know where you guys are working but very much a broadcast standard.....
4K isn't a standard either it's useful as are larger resolutions for digital repositioning and large projection but there is no real benefit otherwise to HD format...
The larger file sizes are stupid to work with.
96K seems to be good for plug in optimising but good luck telling a raw file from a 44.1 file in a blind situation. 48K is the video standard and I've never worked with an editor who could hear the difference.
Bigger isn't always better and honestly unless you really know what you are doing, the standards work fine (even when you know what you're doing!). A lot of people on here aren't pros and don't need the esoterics. FWIW..... myths are easy to spread......
Old 5 days ago
  #435
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennybro View Post
Few things to unpack...
-Motion blur is a function of shutter speed, not frame rate.
-Mostly, high speed frame rate acquisition is used when slow motion is needed.
-24 FPS was settled on because it uses less film, and film is very expensive. Persistence of Vision functions fine down to about 16 FPS. It works slightly better at 24, but no better above that rate.
-Our brains 'natural frame rate' is a result of the brain's processing speed. It is very high, something like 1000 FPS.
-Video 'blur' does not translate to the audio world. There is no audio 'blur.' The D to A process recreates the original continuous analog signal, not individual audio frames.
Actually silent film was 18fps standard. 16fps begins to break down..... 24 fps was for sound since higher speed has more fidelity. If you buy an old 8mm projector chances are it has 18 and 16fps speeds.....

You actually "see" as a series of still images. That's why it's illegal to put single frame adverts in films. People actually used to do that. For a cool read try Subliminal Seduction....
Old 5 days ago
  #436
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soldat View Post
Survivor Bias too. If you check what films came out in the same month as Apocalypse Now I bet the huge majority of them were awful.
dunno how many films were released the same month (probably not that many) but i'm pretty much convinced that what taviani, zeffirelli, tarkowski, siegel, fosse, scott, ashby, nelson, bridges etc. released the same year did NOT sound awful: in fact, most of these old films sound pretty good, not only by yesterday's standard or just according to my taste!
Old 5 days ago
  #437
Gear Maniac
 

INTERMISSION:

Facebook reminded me today of the time I read and could not but share this review about an interconnect cable, which I share here since it kinda fits.

Transmission of music data at rates faster than the speed of light seemed convenient, until I realized I was hearing the music before I actually wanted to play it. Apparently Denon forgot how accustomed most of us are to unidirectional time and the general laws of physics. I tried to get used to this effect but hearing songs play before I even realized I was in the mood for them just really screwed up my preconceptions of choice and free will. I'm still having a major existential hangover.

Would not purchase again.
Old 5 days ago
  #438
Lives for gear
 
IanBSC's Avatar
With regard to the sample rate question, it would be interesting to note the ITB/OTB breakdown of commenters here.

My guess is that those who like higher sample rates are more likely OTB or hybrid, or have more minimal/acoustic ITB projects, and those who advocate 44/48 are more exclusively ITB. The obvious factor would be DSP power which is central to big ITB projects, but I think a secondary reason may be that ITB setups are generally not able to compare the sound through their converters with the signal before it hits the converters.

I think also whether one is doing a direct sample rate comparison vs playing with SRC is also a factor.
Old 5 days ago
  #439
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sax512 View Post
Because it's a myth. There is no 'ringing'.
A "myth"..? You can't be serious.

https://cravedsp.com/blog/linear-phase-eq-explained

Linear phase "pre ringing" audio examples?
Old 5 days ago
  #440
Quote:
He is right. Check this out to get interesting in-depth information on how digital audio works and what that "ringing" actually is.



Those "ringing ripples" are supposed to be there.
You get them when you bandlimit (ie. remove unwanted frequencies) from the audio signal. You also get them if you implement the highest quality digital filters/EQs possible, i.e. linear phase FIR filters.
Old 5 days ago
  #441
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraku View Post
Those "ringing ripples" are supposed to be there.
I think Tui might have been referring to pre/post-echo rather than the Gibbs phenomenon (ripples). Linear Phase filter pre-echo with large IR's is very audible on low frequency material.

Alistair
Old 5 days ago
  #442
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraku View Post

Those "ringing ripples" are supposed to be there.
I don't care if anyone thinks they are "supposed to be there". Linear phase filters sound horrible and I never use them, however, many people do and unwittingly damage their mixes.

Minimum phase filters still cause post-ringing.

Consider how many digital filters have been used to produce a typical modern recording. The cumulative effect isn't pretty.
Old 5 days ago
  #443
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Because you claimed it was a selling point for the digital industry, looking for an 'advantage' to push to naive consumers.
My point is that the ability to choose 96khz hasn't sold a UAD Apollo, or Logic Pro to me, or I suspect anyone. It's just a given. Every product has that offering and the consumer chooses the sample rate they want to work at, be it 44.1khz or 96khz.
If you reread the part you quoted (or the whole post) or simply read my dozens and dozens of posts on the subject, you will see that I am not arguing against 96 KHz even though I (and my clients) don't use it.

I argue against rates above 96 KHz and even then I include caveats and exceptions in my arguments.

You really should stick to responding to what I write rather than stuff you imagine I might mean.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Ironically, I'm sure more than 99% of film scores are recorded at 96khz.
Certainly, every major studio session I've done for the last ten years has been run at 96khz.
And another non sequitur... Where is the irony?

Not to mention that films are rarely mixed at 96 KHz. When you are dealing with large mixes that could end up having 1000 tracks or above, wasting resources on 96 KHz is counter productive. (PT halving your track count is the first hurdle to deal with...). So the score might (on occasion) be recorded and mixed at 96 KHz but it will most likely be converted to 48 KHz when added to the film mix.

The same applies to sound design. Sounds might be recorded at higher sample rates for sound design purposes and worked on in higher sample rate projects but the final results are most likely to be converted to 48 KHz before being used in the film mix.

And lastly, don't confuse production sample rates and bit depth with delivery sample rates and bit depths. They are not necessarily the same.

Alistair
Old 5 days ago
  #444
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tui View Post
I don't care if anyone thinks they are "supposed to be there". Linear phase filters sound horrible and I never use them, however, many people do and unwittingly damage their mixes.
Linear Phase filters can be used for mixing but you have to be aware of how they work. Large IR's on a low-frequencies for instance are a big no no. (Except maybe as a weird sound effect?). But if you use small IR's, the phase is preserved and pre-echo can be kept small enough not to be audible. They are useful tools. Whether they are appropriate for the task at hand depends on what you need/want to do.

And btw, you probably use LP filters every time you use a converter.

Alistair
Old 5 days ago
  #445
my question now is why is it even offered to the consumer on ALL the highest end converters? ..when is apogee going to chime in ..or mytek ..or Lavry..or Antelope Audio’s Eclipse 384kHz A/D & D/A converter.. when are they going to chime in and back up their products
Old 5 days ago
  #446
Gear Maniac
 
cjack2020's Avatar
For the last year or so I’ve been tracking at 44 & mixing at 96.
Old 5 days ago
  #447
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cjack2020 View Post
For the last year or so I’ve been tracking at 44 & mixing at 96.
Probably a smart thing to do. It's not that 96 kHz is inherently inferior. It's the extra frequency content that is the problem. 96 kHz with no content above 20 kHz is just as fine as 44.1.
Actually, given the less than perfect design of some plugins, I gather, even more fool proof.
Of course, you need to make sure that the filters going from 44 to 96 are done right, so that's the catch. But at least aliasing is not a problem, going up in frequency. I mean, it could still be, but that means a very crappy filter design.

Some posts ago someone posted a link to a thread where you can download a free linear phase lowpass to apply (that would be the main use, for me) after every plug in that creates ultrasonic harmonics. For whatever reason (latency, very likely) they didn't make it a brickwall and doesn't work at 44.1, but I think shaving off ultrasound content as soon as it is created in every step of the audio process is a very good work practice.
Maybe if latency is not a problem for you you could try to find brickwall FIRs at 44.1 to apply after every step where you think you might have created harmonics (compressors, limiters, parts where wave peaks or worse clips, etc).
If anybody even makes them..
Old 5 days ago
  #448
Lives for gear
 
kennybro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Not really. It doesn't even lock with US TV NTSC Frame Rates, which, contrary to popular belief, are not 30 FPS. They are 29.97 FPS!

A 30 FPS rate apparently caused phasing between the 30 FPS video rate and 48 KHz audio signal so they switched to 29.97 FPS.

Alistair
Well... 29.97 is no longer necessary in the digital age, and was implemented to make audio and video carriers play well together in the analog age. B&W video played very well with the audio carrier at true 30fps, which was chosen because it is half of 60, the electric cycle rate in the USA, that was used as the frame rate timing device. Europe chose 25fps because the electric cycle rate is 50. 29.97fps has nothing to do with digital audio; in fact digital audio works fine with color video running at true 30fps. But we are stuck with the legacy of 29.97.

Many confuse this with drop frame, which only applies to time code. Code runs at 30fps, but drops the first two frames of every minute except every tenth minute... Voila'! Time code running 30 locks with video running 29.97.

Here is the full story on why the video world settled at 48khz audio sample.
https://www.tvtechnology.com/opinion...8-khz-question
Old 5 days ago
  #449
Lives for gear
 
kennybro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardis View Post
Actually silent film was 18fps standard. 16fps begins to break down..... 24 fps was for sound since higher speed has more fidelity. If you buy an old 8mm projector chances are it has 18 and 16fps speeds.....
So much misinformation here. 24fps for film was not chosen because of higher fidelity for the sound. In fact, silent films were shot at 16fps, but most often projected at speeds in the 20-something fps rate; rarely if ever projected at 16fps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardis View Post
You actually "see" as a series of still images. That's why it's illegal to put single frame adverts in films. People actually used to do that. For a cool read try Subliminal Seduction....
A friend did her doctorate dissertation on Subliminal Seduction, and after extensive research, the conclusion was that SS is bunk. It originated from the claim that popcorn was being sold by inserting frames that only registered in the subconscious mind. Actually, it does not work. "Subliminal" messages of a sort can be communicated to viewers via copy that appeals to wants and needs instead of product information, but we do not respond to single frames of popcorn boxes, or severed heads in ice cubes.

The famous 1999 Harvard study did show that, in very minor ways, in very specific situations, people can be made aware of information with exposure of about 1/10th second. But it's extremely qualified in its conclusions.

Wilson Bryan Key write that silly book about severed heads in magazine whiskey ads. I read it in the 70's, and had a laugh back then. Decades later, my friend's dissertation locked the scam aspect of this sensationalistic popular press pulp.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30878843
Old 4 days ago
  #450
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post

I rarely see 96k sessions - but then I’m mainly doing rock and pop.
Everything I've done for the last ten years has been 96khz.
However I'm not working weekly, or even monthly.
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
Forum Jump
Forum Jump