The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
sample rate
Old 2 weeks ago
  #1
sample rate

are ya'll working/delivering at 44.1 or 48?

I find that working at 44.1 yields better results than working at 48 and downsampling so I'm wondering how likely it is that tracks will end up back down to 44.1 if I start working and delivering at 48

I'm thinking it'd probably be best to stick to 44.1, thoughts?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #2
Here for the gear
 

I keep everything at 48k since that's where it's going to end up in for picture.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3
Lives for gear
 

there's a reason film/tv/broadcast has been on 48k...

...and i have yet to hear a piece of gear which sounds significantly different when running on 44k vs 48k, especially with 44k sounding 'better': in fact, that'd be a reason to drop it immediately!
Old 2 weeks ago
  #4
Gear Head
 

192. [dons flame-proof suit].



KOTS
Old 2 weeks ago
  #5
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingoftheslutz View Post
192. [dons flame-proof suit].



KOTS
you'll need TWO flame suits.....
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmicide View Post
are ya'll working/delivering at 44.1 or 48?

I find that working at 44.1 yields better results than working at 48 and downsampling so I'm wondering how likely it is that tracks will end up back down to 44.1 if I start working and delivering at 48

I'm thinking it'd probably be best to stick to 44.1, thoughts?
in film (which is after all - this forum)... 44.1 is a dead format. YouTube converts to 44.1, but there's bigger issues with YT conversion than sample rate. Just stick with 48
Old 2 weeks ago
  #7
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
you'll need TWO flame suits.....
I have a spare. I may need to borrow one of yours also. : )


KOTS
Old 2 weeks ago
  #8
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingoftheslutz View Post
I have a spare. I may need to borrow one of yours also. : )


KOTS
Old 2 weeks ago
  #9
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmicide View Post
are ya'll working/delivering at 44.1 or 48?

I find that working at 44.1 yields better results than working at 48 and downsampling so I'm wondering how likely it is that tracks will end up back down to 44.1 if I start working and delivering at 48

I'm thinking it'd probably be best to stick to 44.1, thoughts?
Nobody in Film or TV ever uses 44.1KHz. It's always 48KHz.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch View Post
Nobody in Film or TV ever uses 44.1KHz. It's always 48KHz.
well I have like a 400 track catalog on rotation at 44.1 no one's ever complained!
Old 2 weeks ago
  #11
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmicide View Post
well I have like a 400 track catalog on rotation at 44.1 no one's ever complained!
I don't think that was something he questioned though.

I've never ever delivered at 44.1 for TV or theatrical.

I also always work at 48kHz. All projects/sessions are at 48k.

So if you deliver a track to a video editor through a library or online or whatever then they're going to convert that on import into their NLE. Me as an audio editor / re-recording engineer won't even ever see that 44.1kHz version.

So;
If you work at 48k it won't get converted.
If you work at 44.1k it'll get converted to 48k.
If you work at 48k and down-convert, it will be re-converted back to 48k.

To the extent that there's anything negative about sample rate conversion the only reasonable approach as far as that's concerned is for you to work at 48k. There are possibly other considerations of course.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #12
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmicide View Post
well I have like a 400 track catalog on rotation at 44.1 no one's ever complained!
Oh we do complain. we mutter under our breath....


Old 2 weeks ago
  #13
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Oh we do complain. we mutter under our breath....


I think it's understandable that I work at 44.1 most of the time since I'm mostly handing out EDM/top 40 type music and the highest quality I can get my hands on for cross referencing is 44.1 wav/flac
Old 2 weeks ago
  #14
Gear Head
 

Never been asked to deliver anything other than 48k
Old 1 week ago
  #15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmicide View Post
well I have like a 400 track catalog on rotation at 44.1 no one's ever complained!
on rotation? What does that mean? Do you work in radio? Radio is still 44.1KHz. Film and TV has always been 48KHz.

There is no "rotation" in Film/TV like there is in radio... it was just an interesting choice of words to say "rotation". Makes me think we are actually talking about two different things (Radio broadcast vs Film/TV).
Old 1 week ago
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch View Post
(...) Radio is still 44.1KHz(...)
is that so in your area? - certainly not in the old world!
(we even had some cd-players with built-in src converters back in the nineties...)
Old 1 week ago
  #17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch View Post
on rotation? What does that mean? Do you work in radio? Radio is still 44.1KHz. Film and TV has always been 48KHz.

There is no "rotation" in Film/TV like there is in radio... it was just an interesting choice of words to say "rotation". Makes me think we are actually talking about two different things (Radio broadcast vs Film/TV).
what I mean is that they're constantly being used on tv shows
Old 1 week ago
  #18
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmicide View Post
what I mean is that they're constantly being used on tv shows
They're being used at 48kHz.

So you can either

a) continue your work at 44.1kHz and the tracks then get up-sampled, or
b) just work at 48kHz with zero conversion.

Seriously, this isn't rocket science. If it's currently working for you then good. But trust us that pretty much nobody delivers for TV at anything other than 48kHz.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmicide View Post
I think it's understandable that I work at 44.1 most of the time since I'm mostly handing out EDM/top 40 type music and the highest quality I can get my hands on for cross referencing is 44.1 wav/flac
If it's for TV then it doesn't matter if your tracks are at 48kHz as far as I can see. You can just as easily convert your reference tracks to 48k when you're using them.
Old 1 week ago
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Jeff Hayat's Avatar
 

I have two libs (TV) whose deliverable requirements are 44.1 wav files.

Just sayin'...
Old 1 week ago
  #20
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
is that so in your area? - certainly not in the old world!
(we even had some cd-players with built-in src converters back in the nineties...)
Yeah, IHeartMedia, Cumulus, Townsquare, Entercom, etc are all 44.1KHz still. Even Pandora and SiriusXM are at 44.1KHz. I deliver about 400~500 albums a year to all of them. They all still request the music be 44.1KHz so they don't have to spend days/weeks converting it

I deliver the same 400~500 albums to all the major TV networks, TV Production companies, Film production companies, ad agencies, trailer agencies, etc... and they all request it at 48KHz for the same reason (they don't want to have to spend days/weeks converting it before ingesting it into their systems).

Nowadays with websites and internet connections getting faster... more and more people are opting out of FTP/Hard Drive delivery and instead are just downloading music they need when they need it. And in doing so, they can choose the audio file format they want to download (WAV/AIF [48KHz or 44.1KHz], MP3 [320kbps or 192kbps], AAC, etc... Makes it easier...
Old 1 week ago
  #21
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch View Post
Yeah, IHeartMedia, Cumulus, Townsquare, Entercom, etc are all 44.1KHz still. Even Pandora and SiriusXM are at 44.1KHz. I deliver about 400~500 albums a year to all of them. They all still request the music be 44.1KHz so they don't have to spend days/weeks converting it

I deliver the same 400~500 albums to all the major TV networks, TV Production companies, Film production companies, ad agencies, trailer agencies, etc... and they all request it at 48KHz for the same reason (they don't want to have to spend days/weeks converting it before ingesting it into their systems).

Nowadays with websites and internet connections getting faster... more and more people are opting out of FTP/Hard Drive delivery and instead are just downloading music they need when they need it. And in doing so, they can choose the audio file format they want to download (WAV/AIF [48KHz or 44.1KHz], MP3 [320kbps or 192kbps], AAC, etc... Makes it easier...
amazing... - thx for your detailed answer.

(i cannot remember any radio station around here which would have been using 44.1k for ages - well, of course they were getting sent tons of stuff on cd's but since the early days of automated playlists, everthing got converted to 48khz and all processing in the studio as well)
Old 1 week ago
  #22
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
amazing... - thx for your detailed answer.

(i cannot remember any radio station around here which would have been using 44.1k for ages - well, of course they were getting sent tons of stuff on cd's but since the early days of automated playlists, everthing got converted to 48khz and all processing in the studio as well)
A long time ago the digital radio audio signal processors (like the old Omnia, Inovonics, Wheatstone, etc) were 44.1KHz only... Originally they were analog, and when they started introducing digital hardware, they were all 44.1KHz only since radio only used CDs at the time... now they can handle anything... but the stations had their workflows and their archives and just haven't changed.

I should also specify this is in the US. Europe has been using 48KHz since the beginning I believe.
Old 1 week ago
  #23
Lives for gear
 

Someone on the mastering forum found that YouTube video sound quality was better if uploaded video was 44.1 rather than 48 audio.
Old 1 week ago
  #24
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Folkie View Post
Someone on the mastering forum found that YouTube video sound quality was better if uploaded video was 44.1 rather than 48 audio.
This appears to be about television though.
Old 2 days ago
  #25
Gear Head
 
tofermusic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
there's a reason film/tv/broadcast has been on 48k...

...and i have yet to hear a piece of gear which sounds significantly different when running on 44k vs 48k, especially with 44k sounding 'better': in fact, that'd be a reason to drop it immediately!
The same here.
Old 2 days ago
  #26
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Folkie View Post
Someone on the mastering forum found that YouTube video sound quality was better if uploaded video was 44.1 rather than 48 audio.
Someone on the mastering forum found something?

Just for my own edification, are we to understand that other people on the mastering forum agreed?

[Not disputing what you are saying, btw].


: )



KOTS
Old 2 days ago
  #27
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
I don't think that was something he questioned though.

I've never ever delivered at 44.1 for TV or theatrical.

I also always work at 48kHz. All projects/sessions are at 48k.

So if you deliver a track to a video editor through a library or online or whatever then they're going to convert that on import into their NLE. Me as an audio editor / re-recording engineer won't even ever see that 44.1kHz version.

So;
If you work at 48k it won't get converted.
If you work at 44.1k it'll get converted to 48k.
If you work at 48k and down-convert, it will be re-converted back to 48k.

To the extent that there's anything negative about sample rate conversion the only reasonable approach as far as that's concerned is for you to work at 48k. There are possibly other considerations of course.
Well, you could work at 96kHz [or even 192kHz with a minimal-latency flame-proof suit : )], and keep them-there hi-rez files for "future proofing", but integer SRC down to 48kHz [no biggie, right?]. And just send them-there 48kHz files to film / video clients [so they don't get confused].



KOTS
Old 4 hours ago
  #28
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingoftheslutz View Post
Someone on the mastering forum found something?

Just for my own edification, are we to understand that other people on the mastering forum agreed?

[Not disputing what you are saying, btw].


: )



KOTS
Here’s the link to the thread so you can read the detailed findings of the Threadstarter and rest of the posts:

YouTube Sample Rate for Music Videos
Old 3 hours ago
  #29
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Folkie View Post
Here’s the link to the thread so you can read the detailed findings of the Threadstarter and rest of the posts:

YouTube Sample Rate for Music Videos
Unflortunately, the thread cannot be considered, because it does not meet the [little known] Gearslutz Mastering Forum guidelines.

Specifically, it takes the thread more than 4 posts before the phrase "after extensive listening" appears.

: )


KOTS
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