44.1 vs 96khz music - double blind study conducted...

[whyterabbyt]

For a proper test the tracks would have had to be recorded at the 96khz and 44khz rates in the first place, not converted to?

why on earth do you think that?

[kmonkey]

Simple...44khz is for kids. 96khz is for KVR samurai warriors (as i am)

I dont care for whatever test someone make. I can make my own thank you KVR!

I just had conversation with friend. He just came from Germany. In our short talk he was shocked by just one simple tiny thing. He said (now i cant remember but it is some small town around Frankfurt) that first day when he left motel he saw streets filled with people and most of them are walking around with sticks. Errr what? Yes sticks like skiing equipment stuff. Ok my response: What, old people or something? He: No man i am telling you even young people are walking with sticks ?!??Most of them are walking with sticks?!!
I asked why the f*** they walk with sticks ? That must be looking like Monty Python show! He said that he asked friend about this (yes he is young and yes he own those sticks too). Friend told him that "doctors" and "scientist" "pointed" that during long year research they discovered that walking with sticks is (bigbigsurprise) "more healthy" then "without" sticks !! They published this in some local magazines and people are now walking with sticks

Of course i did not believe him until he present me some photos. Now just to clarify that i am not saying "German people are in mental disorder" or whatever. Just to stay away from flame. During my visit to Berlin i did not saw nothing like that and simply i love Germany

My point is that if something is published you just take it with grain of salt. In other case you are making fool of yourself.

If you are mixing ITB and still you cant hear difference between 44khz and 96khz durring processing(even after converting) (oh and this difference is especially noticeable on VSTi) then there are few logical reasons for that. Firstly you are not "KVR Samurai warrior"(yes i will take credits for inventing that ) that is sure. You are deaf, you should clean your ears, or you should get at least poor acoustic room treatment if you dont have money for something better. If there is nothing from that then simply change your job-hobby! Calm down people, nothing to be shocked

...um standard: take my apology for bad english sentence is still actual...

[gwahorton]

It's completely irrelevant that we can't consciously perceive any difference between music delivered at 44.1kHz and at 96kHz. What matters is that our emotional response to music is better when it includes frequencies higher than those recorded at 44.1kHz. That's demonstrated conclusively in the two studies from which I quoted on page two. Comfortable listening levels are also higher, and fatigue postponed, when music is delivered at higher sample rates. It may be audiophile bollocks to claim that one can hear the difference between 44.1kHz and 96kHz, but it's not audiophile bollocks to prefer recordings delivered at 96kHz. Perception and reponse are two different things, and it's the second that matters. Perhaps the sanest sample-rate to use during production is 88.2kHz, allowing cleanly down-sampled delivery on CD as well as high frequency-containing delivery in WAV-style formats.

[kmonkey]

And now.....


No but...

[noiselurker]

Another strike against audiophile BS. 44.1khz is just fine for a final delivery format.

Why are folks even still arguing this?

Ok, I building(very slowly unfortunately) a hybrid euro/frac(cheap Blacet power supplies)/Wiard modular system. It's as analog as you can get, except the wavetable oscillators. However, I'm only doing it for my own "personal enjoyment", and also there are some modules that are pretty dang unique, that aren't really offered by any vsti(not "ready to go", obviously you could make them in reaktor, or synthedit).

Plus....Some of us don't down sample for releases to the pulbic, they are released on DVD, at 96khz. So yes obviously that makes a differenc between 44 or 48 khz. So when "audiophiles",.....and I know some people who still only buy records on vinyl or DVD 96khz to just listen to, they don't buy CD's anymore. Granted it is not a large target audience, but there is a niche for producing things at that sample rate and releasing it on DVD.

I don't buy really any CD's anymore(ok, I bought an odd japanese MBV sounding band, and a band called "Smoo", because they made a whole album only using a wiard 6 module modular, and "Copland" buy the Bernstein New Yourk Philharmonic). Those three CD's I would have LOVED to be able to get at 96khz. I'm thinking I could find Aaron Copland's compositions on DVD. But that is about it. Even Smoo who did the whole album analouge probably did not have the money to produce a line of DVD's to sell(I don't know what they recorded into, analouge board, digital, or maybe analouge and THEN downsampled it onto CD).

I'd love to have a blind test of the Smoo album done entirely with the Wiard Six Pack Classic Modular(actually with Wiard it's closer to a 12+ pack because of the size of the plates, all of which have multiple functionality, like envelopes, and LFO's with a VCO etc. etc.). So yes most of us, do just use 44.1khz. However some of us don't bother to downsample and just release Songs/Samples at 96khz. I've found that most of the audible differences I've heard in my own tests(not on purpose, just listening to both songs one at 96khz the other at 44.1 khz just to relax), seemed to include "noise", rather artifacts from some of the actuall electronic converters "hum" and analog to digital converters, or digital to analog converters(rarely).

I've also noticed that when I use my crappy Emu-"crap" card as opposed to a Kyma analog in, there is less of that noise in the downsampling.

I do have above average hearing in my left ear(quite a bit above), but waaaay below average hearing in my right ear, so I have to try to take in stereo and surround sound with my left ear, and quite frankly it's starting to become a pain in the ass as my right ear seams to suck more every year. But as a result of the above average hearing in the left ear, I notice some hum and noise that none of my friends notice, so it's there, just not very much. And it's NOT THERE all the time, if you have IMMACULATE converters, I will not be able to hear any difference most likely.

Ok that was too long, so to sum up:

1. I can't believe I typed this much about this suject again.

2. I can't believe people are still arguing against "MATH"!!!!!!!!!!! You can not argue with MATH, it's like arguing with God, ur just going to be wrong all the time.

3. The reason alot of people talk about analouge or higher sample rates on here, I think is because we like to enjoy the sound of it "live" in our own homes, or gigging in a show. Trust me, there is some analouge gear that during a show will alter your musical experience, or rather, you will "feel the air vibrations hit you" even at quite a distance, but you won't hear it.

So, I just happen to do some 96khz stuff not downsampled, by request in the local area, and I do like to hear the full sound of analog gear, or very well programmed digital oscillators and filters at 96khz.

A. Zebra does have a filter in it(that I embarassingly forgot about while typing to URS oops) that brings a soud soo close to an analouge filter even at lower sample and bit rates. I also find that Creamware(or SonicCore), and Clavia do a nice job at there respective sample rates. Clavia obviously has upped there sample rate to 96 khz in their modulars for some time, and yes they do sound better(I have no way of knowing if it's the sample rate, or perhaps better programming, I would guess, it's a combination of both) than the first generation of their modulars. Creamware, I had the PLEASURE to own several cards, but had to sell all of them to cover "live expenses"(hate those things ). Their general instruments sounded much better than say "reaktor" even when you push reaktor's sample rate through the roof, which goes to show you that a WELL programmed piece of software can actually sound better than simply upping the sample rate(a notion I did not used to believe, but do now). SonicCore has got it up, and they are introducing 64 bit drivers, newere more powerfull Sharc processing chips, and I think a higher sample rate. I would like to here what they sound like, at 192 khz, if that is indeed what they've done.

B. To me, really the most important thing at the end of the day, is simply if a piece of software supports 64 bit sound, because then I can take full advantage of the quadcore and dual core chips. Seriously that is mmore important to me than trying to "squint" with my left ear to hear sound differences on double blind tests). Because despite all the hardware talk, I for the most part am a software guy. I love vsti's, they are soooo much simpler to manage, take up only maybe a few electrons of space , and honestly I get alot more done using them than hardware for some reason? Not sure why, oh yeah, they have patch memory, and there is no worry about having to switch midi setups sometime. Ah yes and the best reason, NO MESS, NO CHORDS, just a monitor and keyboard, so even though I dropped steinberg in favor of three other Daw's, I have to thank them for the VSTI revolution.

I now have carpel tunnel syndrome.

[kmonkey]

Another strike against audiophile BS. 44.1khz is just fine for a final delivery format.

Why are folks even still arguing this?

Ok, I building(very slowly unfortunately) a hybrid euro/frac(cheap Blacet power supplies)/Wiard modular system. It's as analog as you can get, except the wavetable oscillators. However, I'm only doing it for my own "personal enjoyment", and also there are some modules that are pretty dang unique, that aren't really offered by any vsti(not "ready to go", obviously you could make them in reaktor, or synthedit).

Plus....Some of us don't down sample for releases to the pulbic, they are released on DVD, at 96khz. So yes obviously that makes a differenc between 44 or 48 khz. So when "audiophiles",.....and I know some people who still only buy records on vinyl or DVD 96khz to just listen to, they don't buy CD's anymore. Granted it is not a large target audience, but there is a niche for producing things at that sample rate and releasing it on DVD.

I don't buy really any CD's anymore(ok, I bought an odd japanese MBV sounding band, and a band called "Smoo", because they made a whole album only using a wiard 6 module modular, and "Copland" buy the Bernstein New Yourk Philharmonic). Those three CD's I would have LOVED to be able to get at 96khz. I'm thinking I could find Aaron Copland's compositions on DVD. But that is about it. Even Smoo who did the whole album analouge probably did not have the money to produce a line of DVD's to sell(I don't know what they recorded into, analouge board, digital, or maybe analouge and THEN downsampled it onto CD).

I'd love to have a blind test of the Smoo album done entirely with the Wiard Six Pack Classic Modular(actually with Wiard it's closer to a 12+ pack because of the size of the plates, all of which have multiple functionality, like envelopes, and LFO's with a VCO etc. etc.). So yes most of us, do just use 44.1khz. However some of us don't bother to downsample and just release Songs/Samples at 96khz. I've found that most of the audible differences I've heard in my own tests(not on purpose, just listening to both songs one at 96khz the other at 44.1 khz just to relax), seemed to include "noise", rather artifacts from some of the actuall electronic converters "hum" and analog to digital converters, or digital to analog converters(rarely).

I've also noticed that when I use my crappy Emu-"crap" card as opposed to a Kyma analog in, there is less of that noise in the downsampling.

I do have above average hearing in my left ear(quite a bit above), but waaaay below average hearing in my right ear, so I have to try to take in stereo and surround sound with my left ear, and quite frankly it's starting to become a pain in the ass as my right ear seams to suck more every year. But as a result of the above average hearing in the left ear, I notice some hum and noise that none of my friends notice, so it's there, just not very much. And it's NOT THERE all the time, if you have IMMACULATE converters, I will not be able to hear any difference most likely.

Ok that was too long, so to sum up:

1. I can't believe I typed this much about this suject again.

2. I can't believe people are still arguing against "MATH"!!!!!!!!!!! You can not argue with MATH, it's like arguing with God, ur just going to be wrong all the time.

3. The reason alot of people talk about analouge or higher sample rates on here, I think is because we like to enjoy the sound of it "live" in our own homes, or gigging in a show. Trust me, there is some analouge gear that during a show will alter your musical experience, or rather, you will "feel the air vibrations hit you" even at quite a distance, but you won't hear it.

So, I just happen to do some 96khz stuff not downsampled, by request in the local area, and I do like to hear the full sound of analog gear, or very well programmed digital oscillators and filters at 96khz.

A. Zebra does have a filter in it(that I embarassingly forgot about while typing to URS oops) that brings a soud soo close to an analouge filter even at lower sample and bit rates. I also find that Creamware(or SonicCore), and Clavia do a nice job at there respective sample rates. Clavia obviously has upped there sample rate to 96 khz in their modulars for some time, and yes they do sound better(I have no way of knowing if it's the sample rate, or perhaps better programming, I would guess, it's a combination of both) than the first generation of their modulars. Creamware, I had the PLEASURE to own several cards, but had to sell all of them to cover "live expenses"(hate those things ). Their general instruments sounded much better than say "reaktor" even when you push reaktor's sample rate through the roof, which goes to show you that a WELL programmed piece of software can actually sound better than simply upping the sample rate(a notion I did not used to believe, but do now). SonicCore has got it up, and they are introducing 64 bit drivers, newere more powerfull Sharc processing chips, and I think a higher sample rate. I would like to here what they sound like, at 192 khz, if that is indeed what they've done.

B. To me, really the most important thing at the end of the day, is simply if a piece of software supports 64 bit sound, because then I can take full advantage of the quadcore and dual core chips. Seriously that is mmore important to me than trying to "squint" with my left ear to hear sound differences on double blind tests). Because despite all the hardware talk, I for the most part am a software guy. I love vsti's, they are soooo much simpler to manage, take up only maybe a few electrons of space , and honestly I get alot more done using them than hardware for some reason? Not sure why, oh yeah, they have patch memory, and there is no worry about having to switch midi setups sometime. Ah yes and the best reason, NO MESS, NO CHORDS, just a monitor and keyboard, so even though I dropped steinberg in favor of three other Daw's, I have to thank them for the VSTI revolution.

I now have carpel tunnel syndrome.

+100000

My fella pure samurai

[hifiboom]

I just had conversation with friend. He just came from Germany. In our short talk he was shocked by just one simple tiny thing. He said (now i cant remember but it is some small town around Frankfurt) that first day when he left motel he saw streets filled with people and most of them are walking around with sticks. Errr what? Yes sticks like skiing equipment stuff. Ok my response: What, old people or something? He: No man i am telling you even young people are walking with sticks ?!??Most of them are walking with sticks?!!
I asked why the f*** they walk with sticks ? That must be looking like Monty Python show! He said that he asked friend about this (yes he is young and yes he own those sticks too). Friend told him that "doctors" and "scientist" "pointed" that during long year research they discovered that walking with sticks is (bigbigsurprise) "more healthy" then "without" sticks !! They published this in some local magazines and people are now walking with sticks

Of course i did not believe him until he present me some photos. Now just to clarify that i am not saying "German people are in mental disorder" or whatever. Just to stay away from flame. During my visit to Berlin i did not saw nothing like that and simply i love Germany

My point is that if something is published you just take it with grain of salt. In other case you are making fool of yourself.

hehehe thats funny but its true...
its called nordic walking


some scientiests seem to have claimed that using the sticks helps to avoid damage in the knees.

there was a professor in german TV, that said this is pure nonsense and its just a good marketing trick for the stick industry to sell more sticks to people under the "medical apsect". (thats what I think too)

the crazyness is not the test itsself, but the fact that many people really adopt to using the sticks.

I always have a smile in my face when I see someone walking with sticks. But indeed I do see them quite often.


"You could also do a test, that driving a car is dangerous because it can cause your dead. So the solution would be not use cars at all..."

It would be even valid. But it still is nonsense.


finally there is a rule: never trust a test, that you didn't do yourself.

if they only have overseen a little thing regarding the input parameters of this test(for example using a mic that cannot handle more than 22khz wave information to record the 96khz disc), the results won't make much sense.

We really know nothing about this test: maybe the information on the 96khz disc was bandlimited to 44,1khz information also. Nobody knows. A format with greater bandwidth(96khz) can easily hold a less bandwidth of information. (44,1khz SR of 22khz wave information). They just say "high-end SACD".

similar case:
There are even many HD-DVDs that don't deliver much more quality than a DVD, becasue they don't take advantage of the full bandwidth of the new standard....


at least they should give information on the complete testbed aside the results, else you can claim the world is a plate.

[noiselurker]

I just had conversation with friend. He just came from Germany. In our short talk he was shocked by just one simple tiny thing. He said (now i cant remember but it is some small town around Frankfurt) that first day when he left motel he saw streets filled with people and most of them are walking around with sticks. Errr what? Yes sticks like skiing equipment stuff. Ok my response: What, old people or something? He: No man i am telling you even young people are walking with sticks ?!??Most of them are walking with sticks?!!
I asked why the f*** they walk with sticks ? That must be looking like Monty Python show! He said that he asked friend about this (yes he is young and yes he own those sticks too). Friend told him that "doctors" and "scientist" "pointed" that during long year research they discovered that walking with sticks is (bigbigsurprise) "more healthy" then "without" sticks !! They published this in some local magazines and people are now walking with sticks

Of course i did not believe him until he present me some photos. Now just to clarify that i am not saying "German people are in mental disorder" or whatever. Just to stay away from flame. During my visit to Berlin i did not saw nothing like that and simply i love Germany

My point is that if something is published you just take it with grain of salt. In other case you are making fool of yourself.

hehehe thats funny but its true...
its called nordic walking


some scientiests seem to have claimed that using the sticks helps to avoid damage in the knees.

there was a professor in german TV, that said this is pure nonsense and its just a good marketing trick for the stick industry to sell more sticks to people under the "medical apsect". (thats what I think too)

the crazyness is not the test itsself, but the fact that many people really adopt to using the sticks.

I always have a smile in my face when I see someone walking with sticks. But indeed I do see them quite often.


"You could also do a test, that driving a car is dangerous because it can cause your dead. So the solution would be not use cars at all..."

It would be even valid. But it still is nonsense.


finally there is a rule: never trust a test, that you didn't do yourself.

if they only have overseen a little thing regarding the input parameters of this test(for example using a mic that cannot handle more than 22khz wave information to record the 96khz disc), the results won't make much sense.

At least they should give information on the complete testbed aside the results, else you can claim the world is a plate.

Really my only question is, were the sticks downsampled? If so, did you notice a visual difference between the 96khz sticks and the 96khz sticks downsampled to 44.1 khz, like did they look all digital "blocky" and stuff?

If so, man I'm definetly going to just "stick" with 96khz sticks from now on.

[DWb]

finally there is a rule: never trust a test, that you didn't do yourself.

if they only have overseen a little thing regarding the input parameters of this test(for example using a mic that cannot handle more than 22khz wave information to record the 96khz disc), the results won't make much sense.

At least they should give information on the complete testbed aside the results, else you can claim the world is a plate.

Did you actually read the article?

[Amberience]

too much p0rk

[Sascha Franck]

It's completely irrelevant that we can't consciously perceive any difference between music delivered at 44.1kHz and at 96kHz. What matters is that our emotional response to music is better when it includes frequencies higher than those recorded at 44.1kHz. That's demonstrated conclusively in the two studies from which I quoted on page two.

So why didn't the contestants in the OP's test feel the same? They should've been able to easily detect the "better emotional response" of the 96kHz versions.

[UltraJv]

Ah - this old Chestnut again Some months ago, there was a similar thread about vstis/fx at 96khz sounding better/brighter. I challenged the OP and he started a poll. First with mp3s then wavs. It was funny, The outcome was that some vsti/fx DID sound different at 96khz BUT it was because of internal differences in filter responses/levels and linearity NOT because of higher frequency content which was suddenly revealed at a higher sampling rate. In other words, the developers were falsely adding a sweeter high end when you went to 96khz.

[tony tony chopper]

[Rangtangtang]

hehehe thats funny but its true...
its called nordic walking


some scientiests seem to have claimed that using the sticks helps to avoid damage in the knees.

What about the elbows?

[DWb]

Ah - this old Chestnut again Some months ago, there was a similar thread about vstis/fx at 96khz sounding better/brighter. I challenged the OP and he started a poll. First with mp3s then wavs. It was funny, The outcome was that some vsti/fx DID sound different at 96khz BUT it was because of internal differences in filter responses/levels and linearity NOT because of higher frequency content which was suddenly revealed at a higher sampling rate. In other words, the developers were falsely adding a sweeter high end when you went to 96khz.

Or rather, it's presumably because some developers were failing to use good anti-aliasing methods in their plugs, which becomes less of a problem if you use a higher sample rate (because hopefully the downsampling at the end of the process does have a good anti-aliasing filter).

But that doesn't have much to do with the article in discussion which is about taking music recorded to audiophile specifications on audiophile equipment and then playing it back through an audiophile amp and audiophile speakers to decide whether it makes any difference if immediately before playback you reduce the sample rate to 44.1kHz rather than leave it at 96kHz.