In situations with hardware synths recording and their filters which may exceed the nyquist rate. What sample rate is good enough and what are the drawbacks in downsampling to the DAW's project?
What is your practice in recording external hardware synths? Just bought two hardware synts I would love to hear your experience since I have none.

 

My recording practice? Everything, even VSTis, go [usually through hardware analogue processors, too] and into a mixer, and from its master outs into an audio interface. I usually record at 48kHz [but use 2x or more oversampling in plugins], and 96kHz if I think it's necessary. Since I don't use any true analogue hardware, only retro samplers and VSTis, using 48kHz seems reasonable.

For Sample Rate Conversion I routinely use Voxengo R8Brain, either version is absolutely great. iZotope RX has great SRC, too. I always pay attention to use samples only at the sample rate I'm working at, so there's no SR conversion in the DAW, even though Reaper's sinc 192 and up SRC is decent.

If I had analogue synths, like Eurorack modular, I would record and mix at 96kHz, although the difference is really hard to hear.

 

Last edited: Dec 13, 2020

Thank you for the input. I reallly want to understand what is the general practice of recording analog synths. Lets assume a gritty moog resonant filter in action. What do you do in your 48K project? Record the Moog with his screaming filter right in the box or up/down converting outside the box?

 

Last edited: Dec 13, 2020

If you're using a cheap interface (less than about $800) then it's immaterial because you're going to lose essential transient information from the converters reactance rate and also loose signal quality due to less than average anti-aliasing filters. If you're using a quality interface, 44.1kHz is more than enough for hardware synths.

 

Transient related to filter band?
What makes you thing that your $800 is better then $200 Focusrite AD?

 

Human hearing range goes up to ~20khz. The 'Nyquist rate' of that is ~40khz.

44100hz is thus more than enough. Unless you are a bat.

In reality, you could get away with way less than 30khz without anyone really giving a fuck.

Just record using whatever sample rate you are going to run your project in. You are overthinking this.

 

In reality you need to know something about aliasing. That's why I'm asking what is better conversion rate. I'm aware of the process and the filter's quality but I want to know from people who do this regurarly. I've always worked in the box but now, with the hardware....audiosex people know their buisness. And they don't make fun of me like you do.

 

I don't see he's making fun.
Riot7 speaks the truth. And at least 3 of us agree or are saying the same thing. 44.1kHz is fine.
Is it because he thinks "you are over thinking this"?

There is nothing more you can catch from a hardware synth by recording at 96kHz.

 

It's not about "caching things". You keep thinking I'm stupid.
I want to know how conversion AD works. When recording hardware synths and sample it down to the project, what happens with frequencies above nyquist? And how I should process them? Is the oversampling good or useless on that material?

 

No, the actual transient information of the signal.

And I don't think, I know. I've tested my interface (which isn't $800, it's over $2,000) against a Focusrite AD and the difference is significant. The Focusrite - like most of the cheaper interfaces - smears the transient and exhibits loss in the higher/lower frequencies (and exhibits less air) when compared to professional A/D converters. I'd be more concerned about that than the sample rate.

 

Blind test?

 

44.1khz/24bit is all that is needed.

Any decent interface will provide oversampling at the input stage when recording so any aliasing will/should not occur.

Once the audio is being further processed inside a DAW pretty much every plugin these days also provides oversampling to reduce any risk of further aliasing & foldback distortion occurring.

Recording at higher quality is totally unnecessary...especially when you consider the final mix will likely be reduced back to 44.1khz anyway.

 

I've also noticed this on all focusrite intefaces I've tried over the years. It is quite noticeable, especially in the high frequencies. There's an artificial smoothing/smearing/rounding that seems to be applied which leads to a lack of clarity in high hz transients.

I'd never purchase one again.

RME which I use now I feel are far superior.

 

Trantients may be relevant to filter steapness?

 

That is very valuable info to me. Have you done the blind test?

 

My opinion, as long as your interface isn't too noisy (e.g. shitty electronics) it should be good enough at 44.1kHz. You might want to read about the Sampling Theorem that explains how the waves are reconstructed and what happens or not during that.

 

I might. But then I couldn't enjoy peoples experience.

 

I've performed blind tests with audiences consisting of engineers and producers, there is a significant signal quality difference between cheaper interfaces and the more expensive. This is particularly evident when recording audio. If the first 10ms of a signal are molested via slow reactance of the converter, the audio suffers. Combine that with budget anti-aliasing filters and your signal will lose "air", definition, clarity and high/low-frequency information. There is a good reason for professional converters being so expensive.

You probably won't perceive it on cheaper monitors in an untreated room but give it to a mastering engineer or play it through a pair Adam S5's or Barefoot MM2's and it is very apparent. Comparatively, when recording synthesizers, the sample rate is the last thing to worry about.

 

You really don't. Your AD converter will take care of that.

I'm not trying to make fun of you. I have no reason to want to do so. I honestly think you are overthinking this. People have been recording digital audio for a long time now. This is not something you should worry unless you actually hear a clear problem.

 

atance of converter" vs filter slope? Isn't the same thing?
I'm learning so have patience with me.