The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
192khz vs 96khz...
Old 26th April 2003
  #1
Gear Maniac
 
cleantone's Avatar
 

Exclamation 192khz vs 96khz...

So what gives? Do we really need 192k? Whats your experiences? How much room and speed do you need to work on 192khz projects?
Old 27th April 2003
  #2
Lives for gear
 
littledog's Avatar
 

Re: 192khz vs 96khz...

Quote:
Originally posted by cleantone
So what gives? Do we really need 192k? Whats your experiences? How much room and speed do you need to work on 192khz projects?
Well, you'll need 4 times as much storage as you would for the same project at 48k. That's why I still record almost everything at 44.1.

20 GB CD projects are bad enough, especially since I tend to be working on a half-dozen projects simultaneously. I'm in no rush to deal with dumping 80GB on and off my drive.

Whatever your track count is at 48k, most systems will only allow a fraction of that at 192.
Old 27th April 2003
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Re: 192khz vs 96khz...

Quote:
Originally posted by cleantone
So what gives? Do we really need 192k? Whats your experiences? How much room and speed do you need to work on 192khz projects?
I've heard many great sounding albums recorded at 44.1khz, so anyone telling me that we "need" 96 or 192 especially a manufacturer I'm afraid I can't take that seriously.

The biggest factors in records still remain the Song, performer, arrangement, production.

Regards


Roland
Old 10th January 2013
  #4
Gear Nut
 

You don't need anything but an AM transistor radio. That's what I grew up learning motown and Rock and Roll.

But once you hear 192kHz @ 24 bit on a live recording, you will never go back.

Of course you need a decent 192kHz DAC. And this is assuming you have a system that will resolve this. If you aren't in to audiophilia then don't bother. 44.1 will be fine.

Hell plenty people are OK with MP3 for that matter.
Old 10th January 2013
  #5
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkorten View Post
You don't need anything but an AM transistor radio. That's what I grew up learning motown and Rock and Roll.

But once you hear 192kHz @ 24 bit on a live recording, you will never go back.

Of course you need a decent 192kHz DAC. And this is assuming you have a system that will resolve this. If you aren't in to audiophilia then don't bother. 44.1 will be fine.

Hell plenty people are OK with MP3 for that matter.
Holy 9yr bump!

But if you say so. The fact remains that for most people's productions, 192k isn't practical anyway, and won't be for a few years yet.
Old 10th January 2013
  #6
Lives for gear
 
chrisdee's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Holy 9yr bump!
Must be a bump record.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
But if you say so. The fact remains that for most people's productions, 192k isn't practical anyway, and won't be for a few years yet.
+1. Don't think there are many computers out there yet that can handle 100+ tracks of VI's and plugins at 192kHz.
Maby even 96kHz is to much for very large sessions.
Old 10th January 2013
  #7
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

back in '03 i was still using my VS-1680...
did those even have 192kHz option...?
Old 10th January 2013
  #8
Lives for gear
 

Do you have a highly-expensive custom treated studio with bazillion-dollar monitors?

No? Then lock everything down on 24/44.1k and forgetaboutit....


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pissing_contest
A pissing contest, or pissing match, is a game in which participants compete to see who can urinate the highest, the farthest, or the most accurately.[1] Although the practice is often associated with adolescent boys, women have been known to play the game, and there are literary depictions of adults competing in it. Since the 1940s the term has been used as a slang idiomatic phrase describing contests that are "futile or purposeless", especially if waged in a "conspicuously aggressive manner".[2] As a metaphor it is used figuratively to characterise ego-driven battling in a pejorative or facetious manner that is often considered vulgar.[3] The image of two people urinating on each other has also been offered as a source of the phrase.[4]
Old 10th January 2013
  #9
Gear Addict
 
Little David's Avatar
I tried recording 12-string guitar both at 96k and at 44.1k making 3 files of each, converting the 96k files to 44.1k using AudioMove (a good SRC), then mixing them up in Logic to A/B them blind.

Only one track stood out as sounding better, and it was one that was recorded at 44.1 but in which I had accidently changed the position of the guitar I finally figured out. Of course this was with my old Tannoy Reveals, but just the same... if a 12-string guitar recording can't bring out the difference using decent speakers and after SRC-ing back to 44.1 then it's not worth it to me.

I wish you all the best for 2003, btw.
Old 10th January 2013
  #10
Gear Maniac
 

Some time ago I did this experiment (192 vs 44).
I used Pyramix 6MC(with Mykerinos AES PCIe) and two DCs-9xx converters(AD/DA),Electrocompaniet 250 PA and PiToneLab MAXI passive monitors.
The difference was very big.
The detail and resolution of the station increased proportionally change the sampling rate. This future recordings.
And that future is available today with 384 kHz.
You need to take the money and go here:
Merging Technologies
I would like to draw your attention to a system of Fairlight Xynergi.
Xynergy has incredible musical and technical ability to record external audio sources, even at 44.1 kHz(through all FPGA processing)
I understand that the candy and bread in Japan has long been made from droppings, but the sound of that still has not been received. We must respect people who love to listen to music. And do not deceive them, making mixes without hands, making mixes with legs.
Old 10th January 2013
  #11
Gear Nut
 

LOL! I'll pay more attention.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Holy 9yr bump!

But if you say so. The fact remains that for most people's productions, 192k isn't practical anyway, and won't be for a few years yet.
Old 10th January 2013
  #12
Lives for gear
 
phas3d's Avatar
 

I find this discussion really interesting. Another interesting thing is that the people I know that rave about 192KHz have speakers that only go as high as 22 or 24KHz. I just stopped arguing
Old 10th January 2013
  #13
Deleted 6ccb844
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by egoEgo View Post
Some time ago I did this experiment (192 vs 44).
I used Pyramix 6MC(with Mykerinos AES PCIe) and two DCs-9xx converters(AD/DA),Electrocompaniet 250 PA and PiToneLab MAXI passive monitors.
The difference was very big.
The detail and resolution of the station increased proportionally change the sampling rate. This future recordings.
And that future is available today with 384 kHz.
You need to take the money and go here:
Merging Technologies
I would like to draw your attention to a system of Fairlight Xynergi.
Xynergy has incredible musical and technical ability to record external audio sources, even at 44.1 kHz(through all FPGA processing)
I understand that the candy and bread in Japan has long been made from droppings, but the sound of that still has not been received. We must respect people who love to listen to music. And do not deceive them, making mixes without hands, making mixes with legs.
People don't need to take there money anywhere, if you found a difference good for you. But there is scientific proof that 192Khz can in many circumstances be worse, the only people who seem to debate this is people in the prosumer lineup.
Old 10th January 2013
  #14
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkorten View Post
You don't need anything but an AM transistor radio. That's what I grew up learning motown and Rock and Roll.

But once you hear 192kHz @ 24 bit on a live recording, you will never go back.

Of course you need a decent 192kHz DAC. And this is assuming you have a system that will resolve this. If you aren't in to audiophilia then don't bother. 44.1 will be fine.

Hell plenty people are OK with MP3 for that matter.


Blimey - some long resurrection. There is already a more modern in depth thread running along these lines.

Suffice to say - all of the converters I have sound better at 96 than they do 192. . And 384? The two I heard are utter rubbish!!
Old 11th January 2013
  #15
Quote:
Originally Posted by egoEgo View Post
Some time ago I did this experiment (192 vs 44).
I used Pyramix 6MC(with Mykerinos AES PCIe) and two DCs-9xx converters(AD/DA),Electrocompaniet 250 PA and PiToneLab MAXI passive monitors.
The difference was very big.
The detail and resolution of the station increased proportionally change the sampling rate. This future recordings.
And that future is available today with 384 kHz.
You need to take the money and go here:
Merging Technologies
I would like to draw your attention to a system of Fairlight Xynergi.
Xynergy has incredible musical and technical ability to record external audio sources, even at 44.1 kHz(through all FPGA processing)
I understand that the candy and bread in Japan has long been made from droppings, but the sound of that still has not been received. We must respect people who love to listen to music. And do not deceive them, making mixes without hands, making mixes with legs.
When computers catch up in processing power, maybe we can talk.....no idea what all that stuff about japan is?!
Old 11th January 2013
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Nick Morris's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
When computers catch up in processing power, maybe we can talk.....no idea what all that stuff about japan is?!
It is a processing pcie card system (like pro tools) with a unique twist where they are able to sidestep windows for huge amounts of processing power(masscore). No idea what the Japan stuff was either, LOL
Old 11th January 2013
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Nick Morris's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post


Blimey - some long resurrection. There is already a more modern in depth thread running along these lines.

Suffice to say - all of the converters I have sound better at 96 than they do 192. . And 384? The two I heard are utter rubbish!!
Which two converters were they?
Old 11th January 2013
  #18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Morris View Post
It is a processing pcie card system (like pro tools) with a unique twist where they are able to sidestep windows for huge amounts of processing power(masscore). No idea what the Japan stuff was either, LOL
it's ok, I know what pyramix is!

And people complain about being forced to upgrade to HDX huh?!
Old 11th January 2013
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Nick Morris's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
it's ok, I know what pyramix is!

And people complain about being forced to upgrade to HDX huh?!
Lol! Yup
Old 11th January 2013
  #20
Lives for gear
 
Joe Porto's Avatar
 

I think converter technology has come a long way since 2003. To the point where affordable converters have good enough decimation filters to sound great at 44.1k.

I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but if you hear a vast improvement when going from 44.1k to 96k, then your converters suck.
Old 11th January 2013
  #21
Lives for gear
 
Nick Morris's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Porto View Post
I think converter technology has come a long way since 2003. To the point where affordable converters have good enough decimation filters to sound great at 44.1k.

I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but if you hear a vast improvement when going from 44.1k to 96k, then your converters suck.
Or maybe the higher rate is the design intended optimal sampling rate for that model.
📝 Reply
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…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
♾️ Similar Threads
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump