Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

When/How/why do you change your sample rate/bit depth

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse







X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • When/How/why do you change your sample rate/bit depth

    Hi...

    Reading the thread about high resolution audio I started thinking... that, well... Sample rate and bit depth conversion is a critical step, isnt it? So anyone using higher sampler rates should be even more careful on how they get down to 44.1. I am wrong?

    Any way, the thing I would like everyone to share is what do they use to make the conversions... I have heard of people exporting full res from the DAW and then using another program just for the conversion, Have heard also of people going out analog through hi q DAC and then recording the music again with another HI Q ADC...

    So how and when do you make your sample rate and bit depth conversions?

    Why/how did you choose that method?
    <div class="signaturecontainer"><i> My Blog<b>/</b>Mi Blog <a href="http://frecuenciafundamental.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Frecuencia Fundamental / Fundamental Frequency</a><br />
    </i></div>

  • #2
    Here's a handy comparator tool for comparing test results from a range of SRC softwares: http://src.infinitewave.ca/

    Of course, you've still got to know what they're testing and the significance. A naive user looking at some comparisons might see 'obvious' differences visible in the the graphs that are nonetheless inaudible. And, possibly, vice versa.


    music and social stuff | The Forgotify Files | A Year of Songs | mutant pop on facebook | roots acoustic on facebook


    The chorus seems a little weak... I think it needs more lasers.

    Comment


    • #3


      A naive user looking at some comparisons might see 'obvious' differences visible in the the graphs that are nonetheless inaudible. And, possibly, vice versa.



      Yeah, I found lots of that graphs and studies... just wanted to know how you guys are doing it, and your reasons to do it that way.

      We I got my first interface 96 Khz capable, and that was when I didnt know much about recording, I started using this capability. After 4 tracks my computer starter to slow down! I wondered why!

      Now I know that for ME and with MY equipment, 96 Khz doesnt have any practical advantage.

      So, how do you guys convert sample rates and bit depths?
      <div class="signaturecontainer"><i> My Blog<b>/</b>Mi Blog <a href="http://frecuenciafundamental.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Frecuencia Fundamental / Fundamental Frequency</a><br />
      </i></div>

      Comment


      • #4
        When doing 96kHz projects, I use the sample rate conversion in BIAS Peak if I'm on the Mac, or Adobe Audition if I'm on Windows.

        When I visited the VSL factory several years ago, I noticed they had Cool Edit Pro (now Adobe Audition) on their computers. Given that they also had big-bucks digital audio editing programs, I asked why they used Cool Edit Pro. They said it did the cleanest sample rate conversions of anything they tested.

        However, all programs have improved since that time. Back then the sample rate conversion in most DAWs was pretty bad, but that's change, as the reference cited by bluetoblue indicates.
        _____________________________________________
        There are now 14 music videos posted on my YouTube channel, including four songs by Mark Longworth. Watch the music video playlist, subscribe, and spread the links! Check back often, because there's more to come...

        Comment


        • #5
          What about me? I'm going from 22k (recording) down to 11k. WINDOWS '95 seems to handle it pretty well.

          Doing what I can to ensure the best sound.... The final medium is a FLAC... it's lossless, you know, so it should sound really good.

          There are some rich highs and thumping lows and delicate mono imaging that I'm seeking to preserve in the bump-down. Advice? Should I dither?

          OK, I'll come clean: I'm marketing a new line of microwave "done" beeps. There is a untapped market for custom beeps in people's kitchens; my prospective customers are discerning types who prefer a more cultured, elegant beep instead of the brusque, bog standard one that comes with so many units.

          Really smelling "success" with what I'm producing here.
          <div class="signaturecontainer"> <br />
          <font color="blue"><b><font color="olive"><font color="sienna"><font color="purple">Every paint-stroke takes you farther and farther away from your initial concept. And you have to be thankful for that. </font> </font></font><font color="olive">Wayne Thiebaud</font></b></font><br />
          <br />
          <br />
          <b><font color="#808000"><font color="blue"><a href="http://www.facebook.com/#!/rasputin1963/info" target="_blank">Friend me on FACEBOOK!</a> </font></font></b><br />
          <font color="#808000"> <br />
          <br />
          </font></div>

          Comment


          • #6
            FWIW, the SR in Apple's Leopard AU looks very good (and much improved over that in Tiger) in the SRC comparator above.


            music and social stuff | The Forgotify Files | A Year of Songs | mutant pop on facebook | roots acoustic on facebook


            The chorus seems a little weak... I think it needs more lasers.

            Comment


            • #7
              What about me? I'm going from 22k down to 11k. Doing what I can to ensure the best sound....


              I believe this GS thread is for you: The Idea of Grit



              music and social stuff | The Forgotify Files | A Year of Songs | mutant pop on facebook | roots acoustic on facebook


              The chorus seems a little weak... I think it needs more lasers.

              Comment


              • #8
                Reading the thread about high resolution audio I started thinking... that, well... Sample rate and bit depth conversion is a critical step, isnt it? So anyone using higher sampler rates should be even more careful on how they get down to 44.1. I am wrong?

                You're not wrong, but you may be somewhat out of date. These days most sample rate conversion algorithms work very well. There are some that are marginally better than others, but generally it's not something we agonize over these days.

                I rarely record at anything other than at 44.1 kHz unless the client asks for higher sample rate files, and then I let him worry about what to do with them. I frequently record at 24-bit resolution, and when I need to convert to 16-bit, I usually use Apogee UV22HR in WaveLab just because I have it. I don't hear any real difference no matter what I use including just feeding the 24-bit file to CD Architect and let it do whatever it does, which I suspect is truncation.
                --
                "Today's production equipment is IT-based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson, Resolution Magazine, October 2006
                Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

                Comment


                • #9
                  I use Cool Edit Pro - and quite an old version I think. Seems to work pretty well - I can't hear any difference between the original and the downsampled versions. (Maybe because my originals are crud to begin with - who knows? :lol
                  http://www.surrealisticpenguin.com

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    I bypass this whole thing by recording in 44.1!!! Wheeeeee!!!!!!!!



                    Not the whole thing unless you record to 16 bit :cop: !!!

                    tel me ... tell me... :thu:
                    <div class="signaturecontainer"><i> My Blog<b>/</b>Mi Blog <a href="http://frecuenciafundamental.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Frecuencia Fundamental / Fundamental Frequency</a><br />
                    </i></div>

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      ok, I'll play because I recently changed my practice. In Sound Forge 10 they licensed the Izotope SRC. I had been using r8brain for the journey from 96/24 to 44/16.

                      I had sworn off Forge after 8. I still used the Batch converter from 5. The batch converter and the SRC brought me back for this version 10.

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        Sound Forge 10 has AMAZING pitch transposition, algorithms licensed from zPlane. Check it out.
                        _____________________________________________
                        There are now 14 music videos posted on my YouTube channel, including four songs by Mark Longworth. Watch the music video playlist, subscribe, and spread the links! Check back often, because there's more to come...

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          Not the whole thing unless you record to 16 bit :cop: !!!

                          tel me ... tell me... :thu:




                          Naw, I record 24-bit. I was just being a smart-ass. Again.
                          Ken Lee on 500px / Ken's Photo Store / Ken Lee Photography Facebook Website / Blueberry Buddha Studios / Ajanta Palace Houseboat - Kashmir / Hotel Green View - Kashmir / Eleven Shadows website / Ken Lee Photography Blog / Akai 12-track tape transfers / MY NEW ALBUM! The Mercury Seven

                          Comment


                          • #15


                            Naw, I record 24-bit. I was just being a smart-ass. Again.


                            So how do you go from 24 to 16?

                            I guess I'll use Audition... since I have it, and it is what Craig uses... If Craig and VSL use it... then it is good for me too. :thu:
                            <div class="signaturecontainer"><i> My Blog<b>/</b>Mi Blog <a href="http://frecuenciafundamental.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Frecuencia Fundamental / Fundamental Frequency</a><br />
                            </i></div>

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X