silence is also 0 Hz. and depending on the context, there is also negative frequencies.

but at least he got the nyquist right.

 

yes. you always keep the first file export in float / highest bitrate and samplingrate you have and keep that forever in a safe place.

then later when technical mastering is required you make an individual file for every format. and for a CD you most likely want to dither to 16 bits because thats for the process was made for - for mp3 or aac you will not.

and of course you will always note down which is which, so that you dont mix them up.

some people also like to turn on dithering for monitoring. i find that questionable, but it wont harm.

 

Last edited: Sep 11, 2021

If you want to do any Ambisonic or Atmos 48k... I dont ambisonic or Atmos mixes will be going away anytime soon.

 

Silence is also DC Offset with some value including 0

 

Xupito is the kind of guy who stacks 20 DC Bias Offset filters in series, and calls it a Bass Bias Compressor..

 

Sorry, what? Negative frequencies? An oscillation is binary. Either there is a wave oscillation, i.e. more than 0Hz. Or there is 0Hz = No oscillation.

 

Surprisingly, yes.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_Frequenz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_frequency

 

unsurprisingly, no. the concept of negative frequencies is a purely mathematical artifact to maintain symmetry. In reality there are no negative oscillations, which is why negative frequencies are always 0.

this is also pointed out in the wikipedia article.

 

Last edited: Sep 12, 2021

Just a quick correction: it's called a Serial Bass Bias Corrector

 

hm, if 0 is already an offset from 0, how we can be sure that they are different 0s? mabye we should divide /0, this often solves such issues.

who cares about reality? we are in digital signal spectrum here. math is never reality, it is always an abstraction.

that website claims 44.1 kHz had a range of 1 - 44100 Hz, and that is wrong.

the spectrum of 44,1 kHz audio is going from -22050 to +22050 hertz - including 0.

that´s nonsese, really.

frequency spectrum has nothing to do with "oscillation".

 

Last edited: Sep 12, 2021

Like a lot of people here have stated: If you're using video, tv or film, use 48, if not, 44.1

 

If you use 96k does it tax the cpu more? Since I use a lot of sample based VI's that are either 44 or 48k I thought it might not matter much but the idea of a native oversample rate for the session seems appealing.

 

not the sampler but everything off its output.

the sampler might use oversampling internally anyway, like most instruments do.

 

Yup it eats you cpu unless you have a beasty computer, specially on big projects.

 

But it can export ALAC:

 

There's an interesting article here which also covers the Nyquist principle.
https://www.gemtracks.com/guides/view.php?title=should-i-record-in-441khz-or-48khz&id=37

 

lol

A lot of people claim a lot of things.

As I said, mathematical symmetry.
And since 44.1kHz SR can only convert information between >0Hz and ≤22.05kHz into sound, there are no 'negative frequencies'. Dc offset is a zero point deviation in the voltage ratio, not a negative frequency. So if you are concerned about DC offset in audio material, use an appropriate filter. Problem solved.

Oh sry my bad: >0Hz

Since a frequency spectrum consists of amplitude and phase angle of many single frequencies, it has A LOT to do with oscillation.

 

Last edited: Sep 12, 2021

Yup Found it. Thnks anyway.

But i can't here much difference between wav vs alac.

 

Sure, it needs to calculate more samples per second. More work in the same time -> higher load.
An advantage is the reduced latency because it's based on a specific number of samples (more samples per second = less time per sample)

 

Well, every flat part in a waveform is 0hz, offset or not.
But 0hz by definition has no energy so in practice we can safely ignore it when it comes to freq spectrum.
Poor sad bastard 0hz, perhaps even it's screaming for justice and acknowledgment. Then again, we can't hear shit so screw it

Ahem... how can I explain this...
I know, taken out of context