44.1 kHz or 48 kHz?

[MidnightRunner]

So 48kHz it is then. I'm not killing my laptop with 96kHz. Streaming accepts 48kHz, I don't use much in the way of samples - aliasing in kicks and snares...yeah, right of course they do ( ). Distortion, meh I don't use it much either, no geetars for me. Saturation is a silly internet fad that's achieved myth status and consequently thought to be de rigueur - so wrong (no we didn't overdrive desks and tape to get saturation, actually we mostly tried to stay under red lights outside of deliberate effects. I was there when that equipment was standard). So aliasing is only an issue if you're making nasty noise. I make nice noise.

I can't hear any difference between 44.1 and 48 nowadays. When DAT came out it was quite obviously different but since working in DAWs digitally I don't hear that difference, which makes me think something else in the DAT medium was the difference, not the 48kHz.

I spent decades aiming at 44.1 but now at 48kHz for a few years, and Markus has pretty well confirmed I have no need to go higher. Will continue avoiding 44.1

I was running 48k projects for the longest time based on various internet posts claiming you need a higher project sample rate than what you are targeting at the final stage to be 44.1 audio. But it turns out that was redundant. All modern DAWs and plugins do the converting internally on the fly. Unless you are using old legacy DAW and plugins, you don't need to worry about that.

Anyways, as I mentioned, I don't hear a difference in my projects at 48k. And sometimes I think I prefer the sound of 44.1 projects, though I don't know if it's just my ears playing tricks on me because I am aware it's a 44.1 project.

[nusound mind]

Look into it yourself, the best SRC does not have a problem with non integer ratios. As we know not all SRC is the same. Did I mention there are 100 other things that matter vastly more than SR. These were found in 1 minute of search.......

https://gearspace.com/board/mastering-f ... sense.html

https://gearspace.com/board/mastering-f ... rsion.html

I have heard a fair few 96kHz projects even 192kHz that sound hugely worse than someone who knows what they are doing at 44.1kHz. Instead of worrying about SR worry about doing every other part of audio engineering better.

There is no point running high SR if you cannot communicate, record, mix, compose, hear a good synth from bad, arrange etc.

Spend time where it counts.

Tbf, the 5th comment in one of those threads from GS

Also keep in mind that downsampling from 48khz to 44.1khz is a bad idea. Better choose sample rates that are double or triple of the final format (88.2 to 44.1). The reason is simply a smoother calculation - less artifacts.

Which supports part of what Marcus said.

I use 48 but have used 44.1. I think I can hear a slightly more open sound at 48k but will admit here and now the possibility that my ears are confirmation biasing my beliefs far as that goes.

I do agree that personally (and creatively) speaking it's low down my list of concerns/priorities.

[mgw38]

Dolby Atmos as well as any movie work requires 48k. If you want to future proof your work, 48k certainly can’t hurt.

[MidnightRunner]

Dolby Atmos as well as any movie work requires 48k. If you want to future proof your work, 48k certainly can’t hurt.

I am not convinced atmos will go anywhere. But yes, if you are doing audio for film or video, you do want 48k or 96k

this is useful resource.

https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/view ... 21&t=96399

[Synthman2000]

Look into it yourself, the best SRC does not have a problem with non integer ratios. As we know not all SRC is the same. Did I mention there are 100 other things that matter vastly more than SR. These were found in 1 minute of search.......

https://gearspace.com/board/mastering-f ... sense.html

https://gearspace.com/board/mastering-f ... rsion.html

I have heard a fair few 96kHz projects even 192kHz that sound hugely worse than someone who knows what they are doing at 44.1kHz. Instead of worrying about SR worry about doing every other part of audio engineering better.

There is no point running high SR if you cannot communicate, record, mix, compose, hear a good synth from bad, arrange etc.

Spend time where it counts.

Tbf, the 5th comment in one of those threads from GS

Also keep in mind that downsampling from 48khz to 44.1khz is a bad idea. Better choose sample rates that are double or triple of the final format (88.2 to 44.1). The reason is simply a smoother calculation - less artifacts.

Which supports part of what Marcus said.

I use 48 but have used 44.1. I think I can hear a slightly more open sound at 48k but will admit here and now the possibility that my ears are confirmation biasing my beliefs far as that goes.

I do agree that personally (and creatively) speaking it's low down my list of concerns/priorities.

Sure I did see that but it's 1 post and the rest of those threads tend towards it not being a problem in reality with high quality SRC. High quality SRC might take longer but no one hears any difference in reality. We can all have access to top end SRC. Afterall it's 2023 not 2006

YouTube wants 44.1kHz (recommended in their guidelines) so if that is where your video is destined use it.

SR is barely worth thinking about if you have high quality SR tools. And everyone should.
I will never think about using anything other than 44.1kHz ever again in my own music projects. Unless forced to for some specific reason.

The whole thing makes me scratch my head, people listening 128kbps AAC/OGG and mp3 or less (and some encoding options employ something like a 15kHz brick wall LPF !!!) on all kinds of consumer junk and worrying about the 0.1pct difference to the entirety of a composition will make with SR difference.

Atmos, can of worms there. Most people have absolutely no clue how good 16bit 44.1kHz PCM stereo can sound on high end DAC/Speakers/Amps/room.. never mind listening to 11 junky speakers in a non acoustically treated room.

People need to get their priorities and fundamental chops right.

[mgw38]

Dolby Atmos as well as any movie work requires 48k. If you want to future proof your work, 48k certainly can’t hurt.

I am not convinced atmos will go anywhere. But yes, if you are doing audio for film or video, you do want 48k or 96k

this is useful resource.

https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/view ... 21&t=96399

There are some industry rumors that some streaming services will start requiring to add an immersive audio version for anything that is submitted to their service, which would require 48k. Even though these are only rumors at these point they do come from a variety of different sources. There is certainly no guarantee that this will happen, but there is also no real benefit from sticking with 44.1k.

[vurt]

fuggit, im using tape

[El°HYM]

The vurt, all hail you must.

fuggit, im using tape

[whyterabbyt]

fuggit, im using tape

15"/s or 7.5"/s ?

[osiris]

8 Track tape.


Offer no longer valid.

[El°HYM]

In 10 Years from now this will be the new 44.1 kHz. The ultimate analog crunch.

[vurt]

fuggit, im using tape

15"/s or 7.5"/s ?

bigger is better!

apparently

[Markus Krause]

[...] 96kHz [...] more headroom and less aliasing.

Headroom: nope, that's related with the bit depth

Sorry. I did not express myself clear enough here. I did refer to the spectrum.
"- You should use 96kHz. It sounds better (in most cases). There is more spectral headroom which frequently results in less audible aliasing."

[El°HYM]

"- You should use 96kHz. It sounds better (in most cases). There is more spectral headroom which frequently results in less audible aliasing."

The undeniable facts.

[Synthman2000]

Does 96kHz exist as a frequency between 44.1kHz and 48kHz in a universe other than our own ? Or is it an internet thing.