bysbox1


Ah yes . . . It's the dreaded Sample Rate discussion that comes up here every 2 months.

I am not going to get into quoting a lot of heavy details from Dan Lavry or Bob Katz, or searching the net for a lot of details about sample rates.  The bottom line is your ear.

The few live projects I have done I do not hear a difference in the live recordings.  But where I do hear  a difference (at least in my studio) is in software synths.  Software Synths sound a LOT better at the higher sample rates.  The Arturia stuff sounds like night and day running at 96K then at 48K. U-he and Sylenth sound much better as well. It may be the soundcard, it could be programming, it could be how the algorithims used for antialias or how they upsample.  But almost all Soft Synths sound better at a higher sample rate.

If I was recording live stuff most of the time then this discussion would be moot.  I would use 44.1 or 48 and not look back.  But I do a lot almost all IDM/Electronica, and when it comes to mixing with soft synths in the box.  They simply sound better.  I have used 96K for the past year and a half.  The CPU and hard drive hit has been minimal, and for my ears, I definitely hear it in the final product.

+1 Hear.. hear!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't know if I have extreme good hearing or train my hearing to perfection?

I hear more then average, I know that already because I have done test at my doctor. Also my sight, “eyes” see better then average 1.0, I can see almost 1.7 on the scale that are extraordinary for a 30 year guy. 
I know it sounds that I brag about it, but I just telling you all the truth. I'm not trying to sounds any special....
  
 
I have a friend that do visit me frequently in the studio! Very technical on both computer and audio, also a DJ and been working technical in radio stations for many years too and so on...
I can change oversampling 4x-8x I hear, he doesn't. I change EQ:s, he has hard time pick it up, I hear clearly night and day difference. I can change audio frequency, I hear clearly, he have hard time pick that up...
 
so perhaps its just me then?  
Regards
Freddie

What did all go?

KenJr


bleh....placebo effect..."it's bigger/higher...it's better".
 
Recording in 32 bit is plain stupid, unless you have ears like a dog and can hear things that us mortals are unable to process.
 
I can hear an audible difference in 16/44.1 to 24/88.1 which I use occasionally - but I primarily record at 24/44.1 and I guarantee you that with my converters it sounds as good or better than your 64/96.
 
The fact is, to distribute you'll need to dither to 16/44.1 and I guarantee you that no one is going to be able to tell a difference between a song recorded @ 24/44.1 and 64/96 once you have it in a mp3 format. 

 
 
I doesn't agree....but ---> mp3 format.. that suck big time, so  yes no point then...you can almost use 22k.. and that hardly make a different.
 
 
Regards
Freddie

KenJr

 
Recording in 32 bit is plain stupid, unless you have ears like a dog and can hear things that us mortals are unable to process. 
  
 

Recording at 32 bit is a waste of HDD and processing even if you had dog ears.  All you're doing is padding up the files with 0's.
 
Audio interfaces are only capable of recording at 24 bit max (if that!).  Most of the time you're only recording 18 to 20 bits of clean audio.

Bitflipper......don't patronize me.....

Mind you...in defence of yourself (regarding the above comment)  I understand how you could have the misconception of a lack of knowledge on my part.  So you are forgiven.  The problem is that is simply not true, I AM educated on the subject, I understand AD/DA, physics, mathematics etc very well.....(the list goes on)...So thank you for trying to give me the "Eureka moment"

I'm also not going to question anyone eslses knowlegde/credentials....or whatever.

In all fairness we are all here to help others, and that's what I tried to do.  So did you guys. Now were stuck in a this way that way fiasco......(nice thread Freddie!)

To those who want to send youtube insults rather than posting them in the forum so you don't get kicked out.....well hats off to you because that is quite intelligent and crafty, but Ted Bundy was also very intelligent and crafty....and a psycopath!

If you read my posts exactly.....and read what I'm responding to, everything I write is 100% correct.....(or should I say 110% correct for those making analogies).

I am also a man of science, and find it very  hard to stray from scientific fact. (Don't get me started on magnetism and gravity).  It seems that where sceintific fact and the unexplainable coincide spiritualism is generated to suppress human intelligence tendencies towards explaining virtually everything....are here is where our problems lie.

You all read between the lines of Nyquist Shannon.....the only person who points out the discrepancies between the theorem and what we are trying to accomplish is Bitflipper, mind you the rest probably know of those discrepancies and simply didn't go into detail.

On another note, I will add that on average the human species uses very little of their sensory capacity, and there are always extra perception beyond documented studies or mathematical experiment......this is how our knowledge evolves as a whole.

I think Freddie mentioned to think outside of the box

But the one thing that that everyone is missing is the FEEL of music

some say the range of human hearing is 20-20K, some say 15-20K.....and then some.  But we can all FEEL the presence of frequency combined with amplitude.  And this in conjunction with timbre/overtones of instruments is how we hear music.  For example the difference between the same note on a piano vs a guitar.  Much of this has to do with feeling as is does with the frequencies, attack, sustain within.

I know this is irrelevant to the accuracy of reproduced waveforms when going through the A to D....the D to A process as once a sample is degraded its reproduction back to "original" is also degraded.

So I still....and always will stand by all comments I've made 100%.

I will also stand back and let all you continue to help others make up their own minds as this is what this forum is about.

this thread has turned into mental masturbation for some - its hard to dicuss with those inaccsessible to arguments - actually - YES nothing is ever proven - it could be that we all just live in a big videogame or that we all are just one of ramas dreams - so i guess that it would be best to give up - trying even  to explain how  things are "supposed" to be :-)
who knows - what kind of benefits those sticking to the wrong information will gain from this...
in the end everyone can buy some books and try to understand - maybe it even turns out that science is wrong (in this case probably not :-) )


this thread was very interesting first - but it has turned into a sensless debate...nothing can be gained from this anymore - other than the info that there might be uninformed people who want to present them as specialists...and then technical facts and personal perception gets continuosly mixed...thats just plain wrong from the beginnig.
actually i just could also state that i like bitcrushed signals at 7 bit better anyway - so they are "better" ..??? - so lets decide: is this about TASTE or TECHNIQUE ??? (or is it about "ego" )
its a good thing to be able to recognize one own mistakes . and the video about the sociological experiment is very interesting - it has also nothing to do with pride (as freddie claimed) its all about showing how dumb people are almost dangerouse with their dubmness because they enforce stupidity becasue of being stupid ...(a vitious cicle)
btw.. this isnt directed at you freddie (the stupidity thing)- its just funny that you even dont wanna see the truth  in universitarian experiments about behaviour - how would you then accept opinions from experts about so complicated things like converters ...;-)
btw: freddie - who do you believe ?

MQ


Freddie,

Could you please give us some details to the work you said you have done in your earlier post.

You say “Here some of the Artist/ Friends that I have worked with and some songs I produced and wrote...”.

There are things that doesn’t seems to match up.

For example;
Denniz Pop was the producer of Dr Albans Hello Afrika. (That was before he started Cheiron studios and hired Max martin).
Exactly what where you involved in, in that production from 1990 ?

You claim that you are 30 years old. If that is thru, you would have been like 11 years old 1990 when  Dr Albans Hello Afrika music and video was produced and I don’t remember your name from that time.

I have more questions regarding the other productions you say you where involved in but I guess you could enlighten us on those aswell!

MQ

What's your problem?
Alban is friend of mein and have work with him!
 
Vad är ditt problem? Ja jag har jobbat med alban + många andra genom åren men jag har inte gjort "Hello africa" har jag aldrig sagt heller. Jag kände "Dagge" med innan han gick bort tragiskt i mag canser på Cherion. Det var just därfö jag inte ville säga nått om vad jag gör pga av sådan som du kommer sen gnäller & dummar sig?
La Cream, ja jag är "namet" bakom det---> är gjort här i min studio! Jag äger t.o.m. copyright på --->"namnet", så vad är problemet? 
 
Har en trevlig helg!
MVH
Freddie
 

some say the range of human hearing is 20-20K, some say 15-20K.....and then some. But we can all FEEL the presence of frequency combined with amplitude. And this in conjunction with timbre/overtones of instruments is how we hear music. For example the difference between the same note on a piano vs a guitar. Much of this has to do with feeling as is does with the frequencies, attack, sustain within.

    dmmi
its hard to get what you wanna say anyway - now that a few folks have corrected you - you come along with those "general" stuff - looks like you are just trying to get some credibility back since  first it looked like you knew better than dan lavry and everyone else :-)
 
what should this mean - a guitar sounds different than a piano? doh - didnt know that - and what has it to do with all this? i can probably distinguish a piano and a guitar even at 11k/8bit - so what about the esoteric signalflow at 96/24
 
i wished all you would just have the balls to make the real listening tests...maybe one should ask james randy to make another million dollar bet :-) for those claiming the "unproovable"
 
you say the video is an insult? well - why - did you feel demasked? otherwise it wouldnt be an insult (think about it)
and you name ted bundy ...omg ... whats next ? bring hitler into the discussion???
 
and then you say "100% what i write is correct" - wow cool - if so why do you waste your time with us hybrid mass of half educated freaks?
meet with dan lavry and make something revolutionary and fantastic - we all would be greatful
 
ever thought about the (very usefuel) sensorial limits implemented in out body - who cares (in the case of music) if there is subsonic audio coming from the core of the planet or if the bats are having a concert every night - damn - we cant hear it (and so we should only care about it in the right context...)
 
whatever - sorry - i forgot you are 100% right
 
 
but in the end its true - there is almost more that meets the eye (ehh..ear)
did i tell you that elvis showed me the notes for a perfect song yesterday - ahh - cant even proff that this is a lie :-) because i threw them away cos i dindt like the song 
  
  
 

mattr

Freddie H

I can change oversampling 4x-8x I hear, he doesn't. I change EQ:s, he has hard time pick it up, I hear clearly night and day difference. I can change audio frequency,

*cough* placebo effect *cough*

Don't worry, everyone suffers from it sometimes. Its very easy to let your judgment be affected when you're not making a scientific comparisons (i.e. blind AB, or even better, ABX test)... you listen to something, spend a few seconds swapping some settings around then listen again and simply hear the change that you want or think you should be hearing.

Again, I highly recommend doing the ABX testing with foobar that I recommended a page or two ago - its very enlightening! You'd be surprised how many people cannot even tell the difference between a 192kbps MP3 and 44/16 WAV when put on the spot in a test situation. I used to be 100% certain that I could perceive a big difference, but I now accept that it can be very difficult to tell. After all, MP3 is designed to cut out the data that its psychoacoustic algorithms deem to be less audible / important than others or masked by another sound, so with resonable bitrates its hardly surprising that it can be difficult to perceive a difference. I will ignore any comments on this from anyone who has not done a lot of ABX tests!

Anyway, getting off topic a bit there...

no you are actually totally on spot here - NO ONE of those claiming esoteric stuff here has even in the slightest way readcted to my 10 posts containing the request to prove their claims in a test - and  didnt reply because they know the would just fail and make a pretty silly figure...
i compared some guitar recordings with the program you mentioned and i wasnt able to discern 3 different converters (from pretty cheap to almost expensive) at ALL - and still i have lot of folks that sendme their mastered files for checking cos the feel that i have very fine ears ;-)
(but this might be true musicalkly - not esotericakky)
 
 
cheers

yorolpal -from the little i can understand reding his post - it eventually is a little less polite than he is usually - but only a tiny one  ...

Sorry Freddie, ol pal, I didn't quite catch that last part. Would you kindly translate?

Allow me, my ol' pal. According to Alta Vista Translations, "La Cream, ja jag är "namet" bakom det---> är gjort här i min studio!" translates to "I recorded Cream in 1969 and I still have hair in my studio!"

UnderTow

dmmi

To those who want to send youtube insults rather than posting them in the forum so you don't get kicked out.....well hats off to you because that is quite intelligent and crafty,

Oh that wasn't the reason for posting the video link. The reason was to explain a particular phenomenon to whomever might be interested. I am sure a few people that viewed it must have thought something like "Aha! That sheds some light on a few things..."

If you insist I can post my original response to your comments but I don't think you will like it.

UnderTow

 
the video was very interesting and somehow funny cos it confirms what i have  been thinking and discussing more than once with some friends of mine ....
but hey OBVIOUSLY what is stated in the  video is wrong and you are a moron - because i am right ;-)  (now was that a good or a bad joke)
 
cheers

Thanks Bit, ol pal.  I thought it said "I've rubbed cream on myself since 1969 and I still have a bare bootyo". 

yorolpal


Thanks Bit, ol pal.  I thought it said "I've rubbed cream on myself since 1969 and I still have a bare bootyo". 

sometimes i really wonder if you were the one writing the sletches for monthy python...