44 or 48 or 96?
44 or 48 or 96?
I'm sure this topic has been beat to death here, but I'd welcome opinions. I track through a newer UA Apollo and I've experimented a bit, but usually go back to 44.1KHz. Reading the TapeOp interview with Rich Chycki made me wonder if I should start tracking with higher sample rates. But it's still gotta go back down, right?
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
I've done almost exclusively 96khz for the better part of 15 years, except with film work. I don't have a problem with CPU headroom or storage space and I have felt like this would be future proof for future formats, and can't really think of any other reasons not to. Whether future higher res audio formats are actually coming down the pipe, I don't know...they seem further away from consumer adoption now than they did in the early 2000s.
And there was always the idea that suggested that plugins might be better at 96khz, but that may not currently apply if your plugins already oversample. How that translates to UAD world I can't answer.
I think if you are working with paying clients, that there are valid arguments to support high resolution formats, even if it has to be dumbed down for the consumer. If you are working on personal projects, its up to you...it is my guess that you won't come across anyone else that will be able to reliably determine your preferred sample rate.
And there was always the idea that suggested that plugins might be better at 96khz, but that may not currently apply if your plugins already oversample. How that translates to UAD world I can't answer.
I think if you are working with paying clients, that there are valid arguments to support high resolution formats, even if it has to be dumbed down for the consumer. If you are working on personal projects, its up to you...it is my guess that you won't come across anyone else that will be able to reliably determine your preferred sample rate.
- digitaldrummer
- cryogenically thawing
- Posts: 3517
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 9:51 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Contact:
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
I use 24/44.1 for most projects. I have some clients/collaborators that use 24/48. I don't really care but I have an Apollo 16 (firewire) and it's sometimes a pain to switch back and forth (for me requires closing Pro Tools -- on Windows-- and changing the sample rate in UAD console and then going back into Pro Tools, otherwise it just gives errors). So I like to stay at one or the other most of the time.
I've done a few projects at 24/96Khz and they sounded good but I can't honestly say it sounded any better than other projects at 44.1. If I'm doing a remote project for a client at 96Khz I typically charge a little bit more because it takes longer to upload (larger) files, uses up more disk space, etc. it's still a premium for most and they are OK with 44.1 or 48.
oh yeah, Pro Tools can record 32bit float too and I know that is the default (PT 2020.11) for any frozen or committed tracks but my converters are still 24b, so I'm sticking with 24b for recording.
I've done a few projects at 24/96Khz and they sounded good but I can't honestly say it sounded any better than other projects at 44.1. If I'm doing a remote project for a client at 96Khz I typically charge a little bit more because it takes longer to upload (larger) files, uses up more disk space, etc. it's still a premium for most and they are OK with 44.1 or 48.
oh yeah, Pro Tools can record 32bit float too and I know that is the default (PT 2020.11) for any frozen or committed tracks but my converters are still 24b, so I'm sticking with 24b for recording.
-
- zen recordist
- Posts: 7483
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:30 pm
- Location: Bloomington IL
- Contact:
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
I work at 24/88.2 as suggested by MoreSpaceEcho who masters most of the things I produce. There are still people that will put out CDs and the half math thing to get to 44.1 makes sense. On collaborations with home studios that happens with remote drum tracking, I work with what the clients want. I've tracked a few things at 48k for clients and I think it sounds fine. I don't usually mix those things so it's hard to know if anything came up that would make me question the lower sampling rate.
My thought is that the gear can do it, I want to capture as much of the sound that the (hopefully well chosen) mic is picking up, and that is the point of higher sampling rates.
Someone higher up the food chain that I said the 32-bit thing has to do with internal DAW processing and happens even on 24-bit recordings, and I chose to believe him and stay at 24-bit, which is what the converters are doing anyway.
I think I did a simple singing over tracks thing at 192 for shits and giggles when I first got my rig going, because I didn't need a ton of tracks or processing.
My thought is that the gear can do it, I want to capture as much of the sound that the (hopefully well chosen) mic is picking up, and that is the point of higher sampling rates.
Someone higher up the food chain that I said the 32-bit thing has to do with internal DAW processing and happens even on 24-bit recordings, and I chose to believe him and stay at 24-bit, which is what the converters are doing anyway.
I think I did a simple singing over tracks thing at 192 for shits and giggles when I first got my rig going, because I didn't need a ton of tracks or processing.
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
I work at 32 bit float 44.1.
I do a lot of internet file-sharing and usually receive files in 16 bit 44.1, so I up-sample to edit and mix.
I can hear the difference when I'm working directly with 48 vs. 44.1, and definitely between 16 and 24, but all can sound good.
At my link below is some Tascam 388 and Porta 1 stuff where the mixes are take from cassette (Type II, no N/R) and even it is listenable, with a little adjustment (recorded to 32 bit 44.1).
I've could never be arsed to try a higher rate.
I do a lot of internet file-sharing and usually receive files in 16 bit 44.1, so I up-sample to edit and mix.
I can hear the difference when I'm working directly with 48 vs. 44.1, and definitely between 16 and 24, but all can sound good.
At my link below is some Tascam 388 and Porta 1 stuff where the mixes are take from cassette (Type II, no N/R) and even it is listenable, with a little adjustment (recorded to 32 bit 44.1).
I've could never be arsed to try a higher rate.
-
- zen recordist
- Posts: 6677
- Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:15 am
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
For my own stuff I stick with 44.1. Back around 2006 I did a bunch of records at 88.2...and then I did a bunch at 44.1 (same converters) and they sounded just as good so I just stayed there.
I honestly don't think there's anything to be gained with higher sample rates (what's up there you want to capture? No one has ever wanted any 10hz on their record, why is the other end of the spectrum any different? You like the sound the dentist's drill makes when it hits that one particular tooth? I can go on and on....), but really, who cares. Compared to everything else, choice of sample rate is not super important. Use what you like.
32 bit float isn't really a recording format, that's for internal processing. No converters have even 24 bits of dynamic range, so just record at 24.
I honestly don't think there's anything to be gained with higher sample rates (what's up there you want to capture? No one has ever wanted any 10hz on their record, why is the other end of the spectrum any different? You like the sound the dentist's drill makes when it hits that one particular tooth? I can go on and on....), but really, who cares. Compared to everything else, choice of sample rate is not super important. Use what you like.
32 bit float isn't really a recording format, that's for internal processing. No converters have even 24 bits of dynamic range, so just record at 24.
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
Gotta differ with you, MSE, on two points:
1. I often add a shelf of a dB or two at 10kHz on pre-mixed drum two mixes to get the cymbals and room (especially if adding artificial room verb) balanced during final mixdown.
2. My DAW, CEP 2.1, claims that the 32 bit float improves the math when using plug-ins, and mixing down. I do admit I've never A/B'd it, but I believe what most people say about math, because I hate doing it so much.
1. I often add a shelf of a dB or two at 10kHz on pre-mixed drum two mixes to get the cymbals and room (especially if adding artificial room verb) balanced during final mixdown.
2. My DAW, CEP 2.1, claims that the 32 bit float improves the math when using plug-ins, and mixing down. I do admit I've never A/B'd it, but I believe what most people say about math, because I hate doing it so much.
-
- zen recordist
- Posts: 6677
- Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:15 am
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
Neither of those are differing with me at all.
I love me some 10k.
I'm talking 20k. And above.
32 bit float (or 64 bit float) is great. I render everything as 32fp.
I'm specifically talking about RECORDING at 32bit float, which digitaldrummer said protools allows now. And that is silly, there's no reason to do that, there's no 32 bit float converters. Just record regular old 24 bit.
I love me some 10k.
I'm talking 20k. And above.
32 bit float (or 64 bit float) is great. I render everything as 32fp.
I'm specifically talking about RECORDING at 32bit float, which digitaldrummer said protools allows now. And that is silly, there's no reason to do that, there's no 32 bit float converters. Just record regular old 24 bit.
- Recycled_Brains
- resurrected
- Posts: 2354
- Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 6:58 pm
- Location: Albany, NY
- Contact:
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
44.1 or 48. doesn't really matter to me.
24-bit always.
If I had more CPU strength, I'd probably try 88.2, but it's a headache at this point.
24-bit always.
If I had more CPU strength, I'd probably try 88.2, but it's a headache at this point.
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
Ah, sorry, I read that as 10kHz. In my defense, the pot of coffee is almost done and I can go back to fighting with the bank about the 6 days-passed ATM deposit they lost and won't credit despite having received a copy of my receipt (check copy printed on it).MoreSpaceEcho wrote: ↑Mon Dec 07, 2020 9:20 amNeither of those are differing with me at all.
I love me some 10k.
I'm talking 20k. And above.
32 bit float (or 64 bit float) is great. I render everything as 32fp.
I'm specifically talking about RECORDING at 32bit float, which digitaldrummer said protools allows now. And that is silly, there's no reason to do that, there's no 32 bit float converters. Just record regular old 24 bit.
And yeah, I'm pretty sure CEP records at 32bit float, even opens all files at 32bit float if you enable same, which saves a cuppla mouse clicks in converting; I just leave it as the default setting.
I will say, converting an *.mp3 to 32bit *.wav makes a big difference if you hafta process the thing.
- Nick Sevilla
- on a wing and a prayer
- Posts: 5571
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:34 pm
- Location: Lake Arrowhead California USA
- Contact:
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
Hi,Phobos wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 8:24 amI'm sure this topic has been beat to death here, but I'd welcome opinions. I track through a newer UA Apollo and I've experimented a bit, but usually go back to 44.1KHz. Reading the TapeOp interview with Rich Chycki made me wonder if I should start tracking with higher sample rates. But it's still gotta go back down, right?
The 2 best purposes to record at 24 bits 96kHz sample rate these days, is firstly, to future proof the recording for new formats which we do not know what they are. Also, in this thinking, if say, the music ends up as part of a larger project like a movie, it can be used without having to upconvert or mangle the audio in order to fit their format. Secondly, you do want to preserve a higher quality recording of your source. 24 bits 96kHz sample, AS LONG AS THE REST OF THE SIGNAL CHAIN IS ALSO CAPABLE, will guarantee that the recording is made beyond our hearing capability, ensuring you did in fact get "all of the sound".
If however, some part of your signal chain simply does not pass any frequencies past 15kHz (most tape machines drop off severely past this point), then it is not worth the extra space on your drive to do so. Check all your manuals for your signal path, to see where the limitations are.
Howling at the neighbors. Hoping they have more mic cables.
Re: 44 or 48 or 96?
I record 96/24 and that's what I like.
You mentioned that you have an Apollo.
I love the sound of UA plugs and I like how they work like my old analog gear but It's good to know that almost none of their plugs which are modeled after analog classics go beyond 48k.
You mentioned that you have an Apollo.
I love the sound of UA plugs and I like how they work like my old analog gear but It's good to know that almost none of their plugs which are modeled after analog classics go beyond 48k.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 70 guests