Who makes the best 24bit 96kHz samples...

[Robert Randolph]

96Khz samples are useful if you want to play them back at different (i.e., lower) pitches. So you can do groovy pitch swoops with less obvious aliasing artefacts etc. Other than that the sample rates don't bother me (I kinda like my pitch swoops to have aliasing artefacts anyway ) but working at 24 bit is something I value, if only because, as somebody has already said, the noise floor can become apparent in certain processing situations.

Do you think this is useful with complete sample libraries (every note/playing style sampled)? If so Id be interested in the idea, because that's at least one place 96khz makes sense...

[cron]

Nah, you buy big libraries when you want realism, and full orchestras aren't really known for divebombing 2 octaves. It's not the aliasing that's gonna give the game away there, that's for sure!

[Kingston]

Aliasing...

let's not start to confuse sampling rate related things with sampler aliasing. Aliasing or the lack of it is entirely up to the engine of the sampler.

But please let this thread not go the route of debate about human earing, feeling, etc. etc. because there just is NOT enough quantified/qualified data to make any blanket statements in such an area. Seeing as how music is much a personal experience I don't see how making any of these statements is meaningful.

I'm sorry, but there are plenty of clinical studies about human hearing. In fact, we know everything about the "hardware" and most about the "wetware". No blanket statements necessary for schooled people.

Correct me if i'm wrong but do we not lose a certain amount of bottom-end the higher we climb the sample rate ladder?

Not true. This might be a hardware problem.

Recently phase differences in stereo separation have been spoken of as 96kHz's real benefit. Companies like MOTU use this as a main selling point.

Motu's marketing should be ignored. Like always with marketing, it will mostly confuse you.

Main argument against their marketing is that "there's only one way to draw a sine cycle through two points in time".

When you understand that, you will realize that motu is actually admitting that their converters are not up to the task.


Another good use for high samplerates would be sound design. Record something at 96khz and play back at very low sample rate. You will hear harmonics that you normally wouldn't and you get some cool material to work with.

As for hearing loss, the high frequency roll off usually only happens at older age, like after 40. Loud noise related hearing damage generates gaps in the hearing frequency range instead of rolloff, usually starting around 8khz (the pitch of tinnutus will be the same), and at different spots around 3000-8000Hz.

Let's spend a moment and thank our current PA system technology for that.


Oh yeah, I vote for fully 24bit sample libraries, too.

[Robert Randolph]

Actually high-end rolloff occurs more drastically with exposure to loud sounds... Which being that most people on kvr are pretty old considering...

Also NIHL hearing loss increases masking above the range that's been damaged, resulting in perceptive high-end rolloff... a form of CAPD sorta.

Also in the graphs Ive seen, after the notch in frequency response, it's followed by a sharp shelf in perceived frequencies...

[ChimeraMan]

Aliasing...

Correct me if i'm wrong but do we not lose a certain amount of bottom-end the higher we climb the sample rate ladder?

Not true. This might be a hardware problem.

Ahhh...right, so the Pro Tools 192 and the MOTU 896HD and the Otari RADAR II must all have problems then, I gotchya!!!

[Robert Randolph]

Aliasing...

Correct me if i'm wrong but do we not lose a certain amount of bottom-end the higher we climb the sample rate ladder?

Not true. This might be a hardware problem.

Ahhh...right, so the Pro Tools 192 and the MOTU 896HD and the Otari RADAR II must all have problems then, I gotchya!!!

They do. This coming from someone who has owned an HD system, and currently uses the motu.

Im quite intrigued to more intimate work with radar though...

[ChimeraMan]

I realised the Motu and the PT 192 are bags of shit and to be honest, they were purchased simply because, at the time I couldn't be arsed to piss about with technical bullshit, reviews, graphs etc. I simply listened to them and thought..yep, for jingles and "bread 'n' butter" jobs..it'll do! But..when it comes to actual artistry and clients who can actually tell the difference and want their music to sound at it's best...the Radar is the baby!

I normally record most audio at 48khz but sometimes at 96khz..(192khz if I just wanna be a twat) and there is definetly more of a natural warmth at 48khz opposed to a higher rate.

[Robert Randolph]

hrm, personally i wouldnt say bags of shit. I love the motu.... and the 96 interface I had for PT didnt sound bad at all.... but they of course have problems.

Quite frankly, it's all moot because there's other portions of the chain where the tinest differences make much larger changes in sound than your ad/da

[ChimeraMan]

Ok, i might have sounded a bit harsh on the Motu and don't get me wrong, I'm quite happy with the 192 and the 896 for what I actually do with them, but they hardly ever get used for serious recording situations. The PT 192 unit is normally used for the occasional virtual synth or audio sample and the 896 does the same job..ok so I skimped on buying an expansion for the 192 and got the Motu but that's all they're used for, digital domain recording. I would never use either of them for recording a live instrument such as drums,guitar,sax or such like. They just don't cut it. I don't what the Radar has that PT doesn't but it certainly makes a huge difference when recording live instruments or analog synths.

[fizbin]

You can all say what you want, but nobody makes 24bit 96kHz samples like my Mom used to make for me when I was just a boy. Ah, the memories...