Spoiler

Yet you know the best part?
Anonymous People claiming to be hired by Mackie and what not will BS about how they heard a solid difference between 192kHz and 48kHz etc. and will call out other people.
It is like those people who hear difference in Audio Quality when they use Cable risers to place the cable 1" above the ground.

 

@duskwings @Mud Jones I think, you guys should be the first to watch this video.

 

No because I find you to be fairly annoying.

I think a better idea is you can do what you're told by others and I will continue to form my own conclusions. Many plugins (synths, reverbs and distortions in particular) sound better when processed at 96/192 than they do at 44 or 48. Processing sounds better at 192 when you're in the box with all your sounds and effects, and it carries over when quality is reduced to mp3 etc. That's why oversampling was invented. I don't need anybody to tell me this anymore as I have done all the testing I need in this regard.

you can not convert me to your religion. focus on the people who think you're knowledgeable as I am not one of them.

 

Oversampling was invented to tackle Aliasing or FOLDBACK distortion as a result of Non linear processing.
My god.
You are great.

 

What?
I mean come on man.
Although this was expected from you in all honesty.
I am not converting anyone.
All I said is, you are spreading subjective BS without any proof whatsoever, much like every other self proclaimed Audiophile and Golden ears and unknowingly getting a delusion based heavily upon either superiority complex or just plain and Simple Bias.
If I belong to a religion, it is called Science and Facts and Data.
No mumbo jumbo BS about Biased objective stuff.

 

Sadly, after reading books and papers etc, I was able to create an excellent listening Environment at way less price compared to the expected cost which has over 40dB of Dynamic range at normal listening level (which as per Bob Katz and the Movie mixing industry is about 83dBSPL-C) and I have an exceptional decay time, Broadband, which made some Mastering engineers think, that I am somehow faking the data (which is understandable given the values are exceptionally low even at 15-50Hz range which decays about 40db in 300-350ms and 63Hz 1/3rd Oct band decays 60dB by 150ms, so it is extremely absorptive).
I am trying to learn audio Engineering and I am trying to follow the methods that Prof Jason Corey uses to train people, to become the Subjects of Audio testing and Speaker testing or Perception encoding artifacts testing done at various labs.

So I encountered a lot of Bias myself and honestly it is hard to set aside ego and understand the difference between Biasness and Objective Reality.



Also, unlike you, I have proof about the room that I talked about. You can search my shared posts but I know, you couldn't care less about scientific data anyway.

 

Right, like I said oversampling (higher sample rate) can improve sound. So you agree. That's why it's beneficial to use higher sample rates particularly when you are all in the box with effects and instruments.

 

if only those who reply could actually play and check on their own that recording at different sample rates makes a difference rather than claiming themselves producers (i hope quincy jones and eddie kramer don t read these posts or they might die laughing) and keeping on posting numbers , they wouldn t look like unexperienced virgin gynecologists

 

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, I explained my tests and what I used and how I did it (Waves IR-1 etc) if you can't hear the difference and want to 'follow the science' that people tell you to follow then that's your choice, science is something that always evolves. I don't have time to teach you just do whatever you like, but please stop sweating me.

 

Oversampling improves sound not because it has higher sample rates, but because it doesn't fool the sampling system to think that x Hz above Nyquist is x Hz below Nyquist.

It is very clear that, you do not understand Oversampling. That is particularly clear from your post.
Oversampling improves quality (given filters are implemented properly) not because it has higher sample rate and ultra sonic frequency data, but because it eliminates, or rather reduces the Fold back aliasing.

 

and i think you should sing in a mic connected to your audio card , or plug sa guitar in it and record the same thing at different sample rates, so you d finally stop showing off useless data and start facing reality

 

No one has ever heard this in blind tests.
NO ONE.
I have tested it as well. Couldn't hear it, much like many actual legends.
But that doesn't prove anything to people like you or Mud who are heavily biased.

 

it s not my fault if you are deaf

 

Similarly, it is not anyone's fault that you're Biased and suffering from Superiority Complex, the basis of which is also vague biased experience.

 

Useless data?
Well, understandable.

Good luck.

And you both please contact AES as soon as possible, with your experiences.

 

You seem to be trying really hard to prove yourself, or something, but you can't because this was settled years ago by Cytomic the creator of The Glue. You can find it yourself. It is common knowledge that many plugs benefit (sound better) with higher sample rates, I've never seen it disputed but I know you're trying to be more of a psychologist with all your "superiority complex" stuff, are you trying to tell us something?

For me the proof is the sound of the processing, Reverbs, distortions synths etc. I have not tested recorded audio at high sample rates only processing, and it is undisputed.

I will contact AES after you contact your local ear doctor and tell him you can't hear high end frequencies.

 

What is this AES and how to contact it?

 

oh I wasn t biased,in fact im the one who started the thread to get opinions, until i found the answer on my own testing my souncard at different sample rates, while all you do is repeating the same thing over and over .Again, it s not my fault if you are deaf and can t tell the difference, yo u r probably still convinced that an mp3 sounds the same as a cd track in spite of the conversion,if it s fine for you ok, but dont accuse others of having a superiority complex because of your faulty ears

 

Audio Engineering Society
Find the email.
Email them about your claims.

 

Some plugins, mainly doing non linear processing sound better due to oversampling and LACK OF ALIASING.
Again, what are you trying to prove so hard?
Oversampling and Antialiasing can be used to reduce Aliasing artifacts. That doesn't mean you hear the difference between 48kHz and 192kHz sampling rate.

Cytomic is right. You are just being confused.