For project/home studios, is there really a noticeable difference between 44.1, 96, or 192k for you? Is it a placebo effect? Is it a waste of CPU? Or do your projects come out cleaner at the higher sample rates? I know bit depth plays part.

What about you? Is there a reason you go higher than 44 and 48k?

 

Oh yes there is !!!!
I did a Microphone Test between Brauner and Neumann with a RME Converter with Headphones and only the enviroment noise, by switching between 44,1 and 192 kHz, had a huge difference ...

 

Last edited: Apr 21, 2016

I suppose it is just like the pixel count per inch in an image. The captured data cannot be discerned at the bare ear/eye (in case of images). However, as you add processing, low sampling suffers the most degradation, like an image with low pixel count per inch. High sampling quality theoretically ensures that data gets messed up the least, with less aliasing and sound artifacts. I know many of us cannot tell the difference apart because in a typical home studio, bad room acoustics and low monitoring quality will mask what we hear. To a certain extent we fly blind. Based on this, it seems safe to say that to maintain sample integrity the most, we should avoid overprocessing tracks. What do you guys think?

 

Long story short: 96 is worth, 192 brings no noticeable difference over 96. But if you make music and the final result will be a 44.1 audio file, don't bother going upper, chances are it will degrade the sound when downsampled to 44.1.

 

you should try 192 with a better setup. the difference is there but its slight.
i've used 192 in professional studios, with apogee convertors with yamaha ns10's and dynaudio m3's
but i suppose if you're using a home set-up with barely any real instruments its not worth it.

 

For the typical home or project studio owner, it makes sense to keep the samples rates in the 44.1kbps - 48kbps range and improve the input stage. If we use better cabling, decent microphones, smart room acoustics control, and/or proper gain-staging, then less processing in the mix will be needed. Instead of using an amp emulator for guitars, for example, a stomp box distorsion and a IR cab emulation can go a long way with greater sample integrity.

 

explain please ?

 

I've gone back to working with 44.1/48 16 bit. It sounds lovely. Especially the old ADDAs from the 90s.

However, for mastering and mixing I use 24 or 32 bits and up to 96k, depending on the project. 192kHz? I don't bother with it at all. It is highly overrated.

 

a little science on the subject:
http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

 

pure marketing, 16 bits is enough if you use the 96 dB range effectively
44.1 or a little bit above should be enough if you are not making music for alians/animals, or use tons of proccessing (streching/heavy pitching)
also the vol-terra kernel from acustica-audio seem to benefit from higher sample rates, but it should be possible to narrow it down to be only necessary to the developers end.
I think the same could be said about some convolution plugins

funny thing is some expensive converters have technical and or legacy reasons to work better in higher sample rates.
at that point it is not about 'quality' but stability. And as studio beeing as modular as possible in terms of digital connections.

 

Last edited: Apr 21, 2016

No viable reason at all. I work exclusively at 48k.
32bit FP is great as there's (almost) no risk of accidental clipping.
There's no audible advantage, in fact you'll end up degrading the audio a bit more, as sample based VSTi and IR VSTs have to resample the content to your target sample rate.

If you're one of the skeptics - try it out! Find yourself true 96/24 recording, downsample it to 48/24 using precise SRC algorithms (MBIT+ or SSRC) and ABX it. If you get more than 70% score, go for high sample rates.

 

But you're all missing the point. The high sample rates and bit depths are to get better results when you are "processing in the box". Remember when you are using analog gear you are working, in effect, at an infinite sample rate which is way higher than any current digital equipment manages.

 

You do know that you have to dither when going down to 44.1/16 bit which literally means you add noise to your exquisite 192/32 bit floating point production.

To put this discussion into perspective: human ear's dynamic range is 120 dB. 16 bit allows 96 dB, 24 bit allows 144 dB. A classical orchestra has a dynamic range of 50 dB. Dance music has a dynamic range of roughly 20 dB.

Indeed you don't clip the busses (any daw is running in 32 bit FP these days) but you can easily overload any vitage emulation plugin. So you have to be careful with the signals anyway.

 

As already mentioned by many, It is important when recording or doing digital manipulation but for simple sequencing or music playback keep it at 44.1/48k 24-bit.

Some researches has been done stating there is a negative effect when playing back the same file with higher bitrate even with a decent DAC or headphones. (just google it)

 

You surely meant 2dB?

Or maybe you're referring to 70s or 80s disco?

 

Last edited: Apr 23, 2016

Theoretically, around 60-62 Khz sampling rate is optimal. The quality of converter is what counts. If you notice a significant difference from 192 to 44.1, then it's the converter that is lacking. A LYNX or MYTEK converter will provide pristine 44.1 capture, and kill a Focusrite capturing at 192. One should invest in a really good AD/DA, set up their monitors and chair position in the sweet spots, and treat your room to eliminate reflections and bass nodes. I use 24/48 with Lucid 88192 and BLA MKii clock - to RME FF800 ADAT ins/outs.

Use 24/48.
Many classical engineers use 96k for live recordings where precision counts. (acoustic instuments)

Power supply (dirty electiricty), quality cabling, pro preamps, mics, and monitors; quality instruments will all effect you signal chain anyway.

* If you're producing and recording using 95% kontakt instruments and VSTi, and not sending your 2-buss out or doing out board summing and mixing, or reamping, then don't worry about anything that I've just said.

 

Last edited: Apr 23, 2016

If there's a HUGE difference, something is going wrong. You shouldn't hear much difference. Because most people cannot hear much above 16k. I can't.

 

I can definitely hear a difference between 44.1 kHz/16-bit and 88.2 kHz/32-bt (which is what I've been mixing down to until recently, where I just decided to do everything at 96 kHz), but it's not a huge difference, just a slight bit more detail and a little bit more bass. If all you're worried about is how it'll sound on Bandcamp or YouTube or even iTunes, you're probably fine where you're at. And it also depends on what kind of music you're making. A 96 kHz EDM track at contemporary levels probably isn't going to sound any different than it does at 44.1 kHz. You're also not going to hear the difference between 16-bit/24-bit and 32-bit on your gear, as very few interfaces are currently capable of outputting audio at 32-bit (the new high-end Apogee interfaces, like the Ensemble, a couple of the new Korg AD/DA converters and a couple of Roland's DSD-capable interfaces are the only ones I've seen).

The main reason I mix down to 96 kHz, aside from the fact that I like the sound, is future-proofing. HD audio is 96 kHz/24-bit, and they're starting to make players and offer streaming/download services for HD audio. Blu-ray audio is 96 kHz. And while you can reasonably down-convert to 44.1 kHz/16-bit with decent SRC/bit-reduction algorithms (like iZotope's), you can't up-convert from 44.1 kHz/16-bit to a higher-resolution format with any gain in quality.Since I can mix and master at that resolution (and probably higher), I'm not sure what the benefit of doing it at a lower resolution is. I eventually plan on mixing at 192 kHz, running my analog outputs through a summing mixer and mastering everything to DSD, maintaining as high of a quality as possible.

Check out this site (and others): http://www.realhd-audio.com

 

Last edited: Apr 23, 2016

24bit vs 16 bit makes a big difference.Stay with 24bit if possible,your music will have more air to breath,less squashed/muddy,more headroom.
If you dont hear it you dont have good monitors/headphones or you have untrained ears.