48 kHZ or 44.1 kHZ ?

[fmr]

also, pretty sure that this shouldn't happen:
(input is -3dBFS 800hz sine)

You mean that big boost in the bass region? It certainly shouldn't... How did you get that?

[Ploki]

also, pretty sure that this shouldn't happen:
(input is -3dBFS 800hz sine)

You mean that big boost in the bass region? It certainly shouldn't... How did you get that?

i was fiddling with dynamic bell filter in the 20-30khz range. looks like its still a little buggy

[PurpleSunray]

There is a Pro-Q3? totally missed that

But back to topic.. nobody else had same experience yet? with plugins sounding different on different sample rate? Yes, in theory they shoudn't, but in pratice devs derive control rates from sample rates, or interpolation lengths (because rate/128 is easier than 10ms), .. or do whatever geeky tricks.
So changing the sample rate is not only about nyqist and aliasing, it changes about all of the timing that runs within your DAW.
If I open old 44.1kHz projects and simply change to 48khz, I often have to rework something to make it sound same again..
So I go with 48Khz because of that. My CPU can handle it, so lets reduce latency a bit and increase control rates and ... aliasing on non-linear plugins is just one more reason.

[fmr]

If I open old 44.1kHz projects and simply change to 48khz, I often have to rework something to make it sound same again..

If you simply change the DAW sample rate from 44.1 to 48 kHz, everything will sound transposed, therefore out of tune (unless you are using virtual synths only). Music time will be also stretched.

[Burillo]

If I open old 44.1kHz projects and simply change to 48khz, I often have to rework something to make it sound same again..

If you simply change the DAW sample rate from 44.1 to 48 kHz, everything will sound transposed, therefore out of tune (unless you are using virtual synths only). Music time will be also stretched.

depends on your settings. some DAWs can do (optional) resampling on the fly, so that you keep the pitch and timing.

[PurpleSunray]

If you simply change the DAW sample rate from 44.1 to 48 kHz, everything will sound transposed, therefore out of tune (unless you are using virtual synths only). Music time will be also stretched.

Yes, only talking about plugins (Albino 2 is such a beast for example, sounds like a different preset sometimes if you change sample rate).
Ableton does rate conversion automatically on samples so that's no problem (nothing out of tune)

[PurpleSunray]

If I open old 44.1kHz projects and simply change to 48khz, I often have to rework something to make it sound same again..

If you simply change the DAW sample rate from 44.1 to 48 kHz, everything will sound transposed, therefore out of tune (unless you are using virtual synths only). Music time will be also stretched.

depends on your settings. some DAWs can do (optional) resampling on the fly, so that you keep the pitch and timing.

It's no pitch problem on DAW, but Albino 2 FM doing different things at 44.1 and 48k.
If I keep DAW at 44.1 and render (resample) to 48kHZ -> fine.
If I switch DAW to 48kHz -> Albino? H-Delay? wtf?

[Ploki]

If I open old 44.1kHz projects and simply change to 48khz, I often have to rework something to make it sound same again..

If you simply change the DAW sample rate from 44.1 to 48 kHz, everything will sound transposed, therefore out of tune (unless you are using virtual synths only). Music time will be also stretched.

depends on your settings. some DAWs can do (optional) resampling on the fly, so that you keep the pitch and timing.

It's no pitch problem on DAW, but Albino 2 FM doing different things at 44.1 and 48k.
If I keep DAW at 44.1 and render (resample) to 48kHZ -> fine.
If I switch DAW to 48kHz -> Albino? H-Delay? wtf?

albino 2 is ancient tho. even albino 3 is ancient, wasnt it discontinued years ago?

[PurpleSunray]

Yes and I still use it

But Albino is not the point.. the point is that 48kHZ or 44.1kHZ is not only related to the quality of the audio signal, but it also affects a lof of the timings inside your DAW.
I actually think that the difference between 48kHZ and 44.1kHZ audio (resampled) is not noticable.
But as soon as you send it through a DAW it changes. Now you also need to take into account that higher sample rate means less input lag / latency and plugins might also derive any internal clocks from it.
That's why I would always go for higher sample rate. It's not only about nyqist and aliasing.
My CPU can't handle 96Khz, otherwise I would use that. I mean.. what's the point of buying 1000$ 10ms interface and core i9 and then.. ahh well.. 44.1k is gonna do it for me.

It's like getting latest and greatest gaming PC and than playing vsync on 60hz.

[fmr]

If I open old 44.1kHz projects and simply change to 48khz, I often have to rework something to make it sound same again..

If you simply change the DAW sample rate from 44.1 to 48 kHz, everything will sound transposed, therefore out of tune (unless you are using virtual synths only). Music time will be also stretched.

depends on your settings. some DAWs can do (optional) resampling on the fly, so that you keep the pitch and timing.

Sure, but then you don't "simply change the sample rate", you do resampling.

[fmr]

It's no pitch problem on DAW, but Albino 2 FM doing different things at 44.1 and 48k.
If I keep DAW at 44.1 and render (resample) to 48kHZ -> fine.
If I switch DAW to 48kHz -> Albino? H-Delay? wtf?

albino 2 is ancient tho. even albino 3 is ancient, wasnt it discontinued years ago?

Yes to both, and that's probably why Albino 2 acts strange. It is almost pre-historic, by our software age standards (It dates back from Windows 95 or 98 age, if I'm not mistaken). That doesn't add anything to our debate, except that it's safer to keep the original sample rate on already made projects, and resample the master, if necessary.

[poshook]

Talk, talk talk... Give me proofs, not talk. And what kind of aliasing do you have with 8 x oversampling? Do you have any sources where this has been measured? It would be easy if you have a project at 96 kHz and process with one of those you pretend cause the alleged aliasing. Send me a file, with the exact description of what you did, for me to check.

The anti-alias filter doesn't cutoff at 18 kHz. It starts the roll off at around 19 kHz, which is different. The cutoff frequency is placed above 20 kHz (a little below the Nyquist frequency, which is 22.05 kHz).

Regarding the partial content (not only cymbals) point me to some spectra analysis where I can see that content. I am curious to see which instruments are those, and which intensity those partials (above 20 kHz) have.

Regarding people sensitivity to high frequencies, I know some people pretend to have bat ears, yet I still need to have proof of that too, especially when I see some timbral choices those people sometimes do.

The audio world is full of myths. It was always like this, for a long time. Unless you give me some facts to examine, I will not add anything further to the discussion. As I said, if people feel more comfortable working at 48 kHz, and they think their work is better that way, I have nothing against. Sometimes, the psychological factor has much or more important than the objective reality.

I am OK with what I hear and have no need to persuade some1 by providing testing files. I changed from 44.1 to 48 year ago after 20 years of 44.1 and never regret. If you need a proof, do it by your self. When I check the thread, you are the most talking person here by far IMO.

[MogwaiBoy]

This is probably a misunderstanding.

There are *two* aliasing sources here: (1) the one from non-linearities which can be reduced but not eliminated by oversampling, and (2) the one from downsampling which can be prevented by the anti-aliasing filter. I believe you are talking about (2), while MogwaiBoy means (1).

Using higher sample rate can further reduce aliasing from (1) a bit by having higher Nyquist frequency so the aliasing frequencies folded back into audible range are less strong. Also, the anti-aliasing filter can have a higher cutoff frequency, so it affect the audible frequency range less. That's the point, I believe.

ขอบคุณ <3

[BONES]

I can't get into your german site but I'm wondering if it says the same thing I'm gonna say, that I can hear(albeit modestly) the diff between 16bit vs. 24bits but can't hear a lick of difference between 44.1khz vs. anything above that. Maybe others can but . . .

That would be purely down to your set up, as 24 bit audio will at times only use 16 bits of the available headroom (in quiet passages). And 16 bits provides more than 65,000 possible values, so you are effectively saying you can pick the difference between 65k and 16M but not between 44k and 48k. It seems the opposite would be more likely, which is why I'm sure it's your set-up.

[poonna]

ขอบคุณ <3

ยินดีครับ ^^

Never thought I would see Thai language here. You must have been to Thailand, I suppose.