96000 or 44100 is there a difference

UHE is now closed. For Technical Support from Ableton, please go here: http://www.ableton.com/support
Locked
cosypete
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:40 pm

96000 or 44100 is there a difference

Post by cosypete » Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:13 pm

Hi guys,

very simple question. When recording audio in live does it make a difference in quality between recording 44100 and 96000 ?

Obviously there is a difference in file size but just wondering whether I would notice any difference.

Many thanks

Cosy Pete

Atardecer
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:48 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: 96000 or 44100 is there a difference

Post by Atardecer » Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:14 pm

There could be pages written on this topic so best to redirect you to an article such as this. Its full of technical stuff from Dan Lavry ( a dude who knows what he's talking about) and talks more about 192k. Check out page 26 for his final thoughts.

I should add that if your end format is going to be CD (44.1k) dont bother with 96k (or 192k for that matter). Go with 88.2k instead and direct multiples of 44.1k. 44.1 into 48 is a very messy calculation and is probably the worst sample rate conversion you can do to your audio. 96k aint much better given its a direct multiple of 44.1k. When you think about it, its strange that 96k and 192k have been marketed so heavily as selling points for soundcards etc when these are ridiculous samples rates to use for product that ends up on CD. 88.2 and 176.4 are much better but i guess they just dont roll of the tongue as much :) I use 48k at work but that is because most of the stuff i work on is for film and TV where stuff is broadcast at 48k.
Also if you cant hear a difference then dont worry about it. People often get a bit carried away with the argument about higher sampling rates in the hope that their mixes might suddenly sound a whole lot better. :wink:

Jim

Fieldmedic
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:20 pm
Location: Southern Oregon

Re: 96000 or 44100 is there a difference

Post by Fieldmedic » Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:35 pm

so I use 96k because the latency is about half. is there a calculation I'm missing, because it seems that higher sample rates would require more processing power and would result in higher latency requirements. what's the math?

CMB

DIgiDennis
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:07 am
Location: DK - 1659

Re: 96000 or 44100 is there a difference

Post by DIgiDennis » Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:53 pm

96000 samples per second vs 44100 samples per second
you see the logic why the latency would be less? ie if your buffer is 256 samples and you tell the machine to process 96000 of samples per second.
And yes it will do more work yet still try to maintain lower latency.

Fieldmedic
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:20 pm
Location: Southern Oregon

Re: 96000 or 44100 is there a difference

Post by Fieldmedic » Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:44 pm

so lower latency but higher CPU load.

Locked