For some things the difference is very big, even between 96k and 192k. Especially synths, guitar amps, space. Try Serum or Mercuriall amps in x1 vs x2 vs x4 oversampling and you'll hear it.

 

You're right. But that's limited to a few kind of plugins that introduce medium-high distortion. That's why internal oversampling is applied when needed.
Imagine a brutal preset of Mercuriall TriAxis (Mesa stuff) that only sounds its best at x8 oversampling. That would mean 48*8=364Khz for the entire project.

 

Last edited: May 23, 2020

@Lieglein

I saw you rated one of my posts as funny while it wasn't intented to be funny. So I assume you didn't take that post very seriously based on what I have just said that people can't hear the differences of higher sample rates. Anyway, totally fine and no problem to me

I am only curious if you are in for a funny challenge to take some listening sessions to see if that funny rating is actually fair. If it is, then you won't ever see me again haha.

 

Interesting addition.

I tried it with Serum and really I couldn't hear any big difference between x2 and x4. I even tried it with my eyes closed, but no I couldn't. And no I really don't have any hearing issues. My ears are still very young and healthy. At least as far as I know

Of course it's easier to think that a higher sample rate version sounds better if you already know which one is what. Therefore I don't think anyone can point out a high sample rate version with a good score in just some random listening tests without knowing any information beforehand.

 

Dan Lavry White Papers (Who makes Lavry Converters)

http://www.lavryengineering.com/pdfs/lavry-white-paper-the_optimal_sample_rate_for_quality_audio.pdf

 

This is true. I tend to switch to 192, freeze/render, then switch back to 96. It has become a part of my personal workflow. Knowing something could sound better makes me want to go for it anyway (even if it won't matter too much in the big picture), or I start feeling weird and uncomfortable.

Maybe try some more intensive / complicated preset (harmonics heavy / effects heavy). Or try a saturator in bit extreme settings. I'm just 100% sure you will hear the difference. When I forget it to low SR I notice something sounds off, it's far from placebo.

 

I took this post seriously. This is the reason why it's funny.
The video posted by wavyj is very clear and pretty detailed.

In this case I just simplify the situation to "Here is a technical explanation (even with sound examples) for this case". "Yeah, I think it's not like this."

This is funny for me.
I'am laughing a lot, most time at work about other people. The funny ratings I give in this forum are nothing against my reality believe me.

 

Last edited: May 22, 2020

The basic truths of ULTIMATE SOUND:
1) Record at 196Kz because those ultrasonic interactions and stuff are important and you don't want to lose them.
2) Cut that to a vinyl disc because it sounds warm.

(Then someone downloads it and listens on their phone with a speaker mounted on a chip)

 

Last edited: May 23, 2020

As much as we try to create the best audio quality with our gear (myself included), it is usually lost by the time it's heard. We use our VSTs and effects to modify, modulate, distort, and saturate. Then it's compressed and distributed and played in uncontrolled acoustical spaces through speakers and earbuds of every degree of quality and accuracy, or lack there of. It's a very small minority who can tell (or care) about the small differences our efforts might have made to maintain that perfect sound. Sometimes it's more about the emotion of the music that matters.

 

but wouldn't transients at higher frequencies peak at higher levels? If you cut some high frequencies wouldn't that cut some peaks?

Or are we using the term headroom the wrong way?

 

I watched thousand hours of masterclasses with best producers - Pensado, CLA, Scheps etc, and nobody ever discuss this problem.
You know why? because it doesn't exists. Go and make music

 

Last edited: May 23, 2020

True, in the end (as well as the beginning) it's not about how, where, when or on what a listener is hearing our work but rather how we use the tools at our disposal in order to feel good about what we create. We work with what we've got and if 192 brings one to a happy place then so be it. And yes, emotion is a big if not the biggest part of what matters to convey.

 

As to my experience not higher than those of mid and low freqs.

That's always a possibility.

 

I'd say it's mainly (if not only) about the emotions.

 

Nah, that's not exactly true imo. There is a reason why a lot of information and explanations could be find about this topic. I agree that they are really good in what they do, but they are humans like us too. They don't know everything either and are still learnings new things, because everything will develop with time.

I am also sure they know a lot of things like secrets and all that kind of stuff, but they are not going to tell that. Well, at least not in public. Why? I quess otherwise everyone will do it and they wouldn't be very original in their work anymore.

So a short summary. When things aren't covered by them doesn't mean immediately it's not there

 

And me thinking headroom meant the volume of a helmet's inside...

 

Good one haha

But yeah sometimes it's probably pretty obviously that I say stupid things or maybe at all times, but hey stupid questions are not there, right?

Either way I can totally understand why my posts could be funny though.

 

Last edited: May 23, 2020

But other than that nothing outside the daw for instance is played at such a high sample rate, right? If I am right only at 44.1 and 48kHz.

So when you record something at a high sample rate, then it will be down converted, right? Does that not mean that all the extra details that probably some people could hear will be lost in the end?

 

I agree with that. In the end everyone has to decide for themselves how they are going to work with a specific thing. As long it sounds good it sounds good. Not that I think it's a good idea to be a fireman without wearing protective clothings for instance though.

I could already see in the future sample rates of like higher than 2000 or do you think this will stop at one point? I believe I already saw something with a sample rate of around 700.

 

Last edited: May 23, 2020

Either way I trust your technical understanding more than mine