Login

Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

If you need to write about anything else please do it here..

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby yr » Thu Feb 17, 2011 1:52 pm

Why would you care if someone else can hear the difference or is interested in subtleties?- as long as you can (or can't) guess the "right" answer using a proper ABX test you have the information you need. No need to argue about what constitutes a meaningful difference (which is rather subjective).

Personally, the subtle and complex ways Nebula can effect sound is exactly the reason I love it. Some people say they can't hear the differences between the preamp presets or that the consoles (and even R2R) are way too subtle. So what- if you like the sound and can hear the effect you use it. I've had enough cases were I couldn't exactly hear what a preset was doing in an ABX test and decided not to use it. No big deal, and no need to declare the rest are imagining.

If you decide to make a poll, you should probably use a typical Nebula chain (multiple instances) for testing. The results might be more realistic and clearer (depending on the source material and presets you choose). I find the comparison as done by Alexb to be problematic for reasons I've already mentioned.
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets
User avatar
yr
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby Stolle » Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:36 pm

Ok people. I finally found an hour off for some testing. Here is what I did. I fired up my analogue synth (DSI Mopho) and let it play a static sequence (On the run). I then recorded it both in 96 khz and 44.1 khz 24 bit. I then added a Nebula chain of AlexB VBC (line2, clean buss, vintage mixbuss).
I then exported the two tracks with Nebula and bypassed to 44.1 khz 16 bit with dither.

Here is the result:
44.1 bypassed Nebula - http://www.parentes.nu/MophoRun44bypass.wav
96 bypassed Nebula - http://www.parentes.nu/MophoRun96bypass.wav
44.1 with Nebula - http://www.parentes.nu/MophoRun44NEB.wav
96 with Nebula - http://www.parentes.nu/MophoRun96NEB.wav

The results to my ears? I can't tell any difference between 96 and 44.1 without Nebula. With Nebula I hear a slight increase in distortion in the 44.1 -version. The distortion is different somehow. I must admit though, I'm not sure I could tell which is which in a blind test. I did find out however that my computer can't handle many Nebula instances at 96 so I will stay at 44.1 khz. I haven't decided if the difference is big enough to consider upsampling just for Nebula rendering and such. What do you think? Can you hear the difference? Should I've done my test in another way? Would the difference be more apparent on other material?

All the best
/Kristoffer
Stolle
User Level VI
User Level VI
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:27 am

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby Mplay » Sun Feb 20, 2011 1:18 am

I stumbled on Dan Lavry's paper on sampling. He states that the benefit of working at higher sample rates is the fact that artifacts caused by digital filtering occur at higher frequencies, further from audible frequencies. Working at 48kHz already has benefits over 44.1 (and 64kHz is the ideal sample rate, any higher has no benefits)

:dive for cover: :D
Mplay
Member
Member
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:25 am
Location: Willemstad, Curaçao

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby TranscendingMusic » Sun Feb 20, 2011 3:24 am

mplay just to correct that slightly...
The said optimal rate of 60Khz is actually deemed as the "most optimal" (but 44.1 being just as suffice as a standard for now) for audio capture. Lavry's main point about moving artifacts out of the audible range fall under oversampling. Further it has been stated that for the oversampling to have a true benefit needs to be some where around 300Khz. Where as using 96 for example you indeed get something different than 44.1 but that's just it; it's different not necessarily better - this also accounts for why in some blind tests listeners would prefer the 44.1 over the 96 WHILST comparing to the original because the 96 version or the processes therein change the top end so much. But this is all "on paper"; in technical theory.
mixing | mastering
Win 10 x64 | Sonar Platinum x64 | 3930K(OC)
User avatar
TranscendingMusic
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1132
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 7:01 am
Location: USA

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby mathias » Sun Feb 20, 2011 4:14 am

here is another test:
i recorded a little improvisation with two tracks guitar and one bass-track.
i recorded in 48 khz as i normally do.
i preprocessed the takes a little bit, to get the the sound of the instruments a little more balanced.

now the test:
i put a globeconsole directout on every instrument and a globeconsole-masterprogram on the masterbus.
the guitars have each a reverb (non-nebula).
i bounced one version with the 48 khz takes and made a second identical mix with the takes upsampled to 96 khz and the nebulas loaded in 96 khz.

the original mixdowns are in 32bit-float.
i brought both mixes down to CD-Format then.
here the links:
mix 48 khz 32bit float:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9435398/Nebula- ... -48khz.wav

mix 96 khz 32 bit float:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9435398/Nebula- ... -96khz.wav

mix 48 khz in CD-Format:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9435398/Nebula- ... Format.wav

mix 96 khz in CD-Format:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9435398/Nebula- ... Format.wav

download with "rightclick, save target as...", and open in your daw. the player in your browser could degrade the sound.

in this case there are no long chaines involved, which will certainly bring other results.
maybe i extend my test, when i have time.

but it is still interesting enough.
as already stated here by others, i can not really find the 96 khz version better sounding, when brought down to 16 bit 44,1khz. there is another sound in the top end of the spectrum, that is for sure.
if i could stay with 96 khz, i would prefer it
over 48 khz.

have fun, (i hope dropbox will not stop too fast, when a lot of people download :-))

mathias
system 1: windows 8 32 bit - samplitude prox, tracktion6, reaper
system 2: mac osx yosemite - reaper(32+64bit), tracktion6(32+64bit)

both systems on: macbook pro (late 2009), core 2 duo 3,06 ghz, 4 gb ram, graphic: nvidia geforce 9600M GT 512 MB
mathias
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 2111
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:25 am

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby Martinez » Sun Feb 20, 2011 6:32 am

I found this interview with Rupert N**e in which He talks about sampling rates and His thoughts on the subject.

I thought You all might find it of some interest in relation to this particular thread.

http://www.poonshead.com/articles.html
Martinez
Member
Member
 
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby Mplay » Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:42 am

TranscendingMusic wrote:mplay just to correct that slightly...
The said optimal rate of 60Khz is actually deemed as the "most optimal" (but 44.1 being just as suffice as a standard for now) for audio capture. Lavry's main point about moving artifacts out of the audible range fall under oversampling. Further it has been stated that for the oversampling to have a true benefit needs to be some where around 300Khz. Where as using 96 for example you indeed get something different than 44.1 but that's just it; it's different not necessarily better - this also accounts for why in some blind tests listeners would prefer the 44.1 over the 96 WHILST comparing to the original because the 96 version or the processes therein change the top end so much. But this is all "on paper"; in technical theory.


Thanks for the info. I have to say my personal reason to leave 44.1kHz has nothing to do with Nebula SRC. It was the fact that I wasn't able to capture my favorite softsynth ACE (by U-he, which uses a lot of oversampling) recording at 24/44.1. The rendered files just sounded different. Working at 32/48 solves this problem without taking too much resources.

I couldn't find any major problems using my 44.1kHz or 96kHz programs working at 32bit/48kHz.
Mplay
Member
Member
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:25 am
Location: Willemstad, Curaçao

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby Stolle » Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:46 pm

mathias wrote:here is another test:
i recorded a little improvisation with two tracks guitar and one bass-track.
i recorded in 48 khz as i normally do.
i preprocessed the takes a little bit, to get the the sound of the instruments a little more balanced.

now the test:
i put a globeconsole directout on every instrument and a globeconsole-masterprogram on the masterbus.
the guitars have each a reverb (non-nebula).
i bounced one version with the 48 khz takes and made a second identical mix with the takes upsampled to 96 khz and the nebulas loaded in 96 khz.

the original mixdowns are in 32bit-float.
i brought both mixes down to CD-Format then.
here the links:
mix 48 khz 32bit float:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9435398/Nebula- ... -48khz.wav

mix 96 khz 32 bit float:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9435398/Nebula- ... -96khz.wav

mix 48 khz in CD-Format:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9435398/Nebula- ... Format.wav

mix 96 khz in CD-Format:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9435398/Nebula- ... Format.wav

download with "rightclick, save target as...", and open in your daw. the player in your browser could degrade the sound.

in this case there are no long chaines involved, which will certainly bring other results.
maybe i extend my test, when i have time.

but it is still interesting enough.
as already stated here by others, i can not really find the 96 khz version better sounding, when brought down to 16 bit 44,1khz. there is another sound in the top end of the spectrum, that is for sure.
if i could stay with 96 khz, i would prefer it
over 48 khz.

have fun, (i hope dropbox will not stop too fast, when a lot of people download :-))

mathias

I just listened to the examples in CD-quality and I must admit that I don't really hear a difference.
Stolle
User Level VI
User Level VI
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:27 am

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby zaminx » Sun Feb 20, 2011 3:05 pm

System Drive/ Libary/Audio/Presets/AcusticaAudio

in there you will find it
zaminx
User Level XI
User Level XI
 
Posts: 182
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 6:57 pm

Re: Sample Rate Discussion (off of AITB Germanos EQ Thread)

Postby futur2 » Sun Feb 20, 2011 5:12 pm

Stolle wrote:I just listened to the examples in CD-quality and I must admit that I don't really hear a difference.


did the same and listened to the CD-quality ones on my AKG K240 because one of my focal twins just broke down :(
it's hard to to discern a difference. if one sounds better on the headphones i tend to say it's the 48khz.
futur2
Member
Member
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:16 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Other things

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest