Ableton Forum

Isn't 1ino's project all made from iported CD samples? i dont understand why you would want to change from 44.1, since they come from a CD, you can't add anything to it by then exporting at 88.2 surely?

UKRuss wrote:Isn't 1ino's project all made from iported CD samples? i dont understand why you would want to change from 44.1, since they come from a CD, you can't add anything to it by then exporting at 88.2 surely?

when he starts adding effects it could make a difference - that's the point, the whole question here really comes down to whether the FX are improved enough to make it worth the bother. From memory I just found it annoying that I had to go back and re-render the track because the FX were suddenly too overbearing, I don't remember it making me jump out of skin with excitement at the quality. But like I said before, I probably just can't hear it.

Case in point, took my boy to see Iron Man 2 and every time glass broke he'd hold his ears and say how much he hated bits where they break glass because it hurts his ears

I actually said to my 8 year old -well the sound guys working on the film probably can't hear that high any more so they don't realise how loud it is, but you can because you still have perfect ears

true what they say, youth is wasted on the young. little fucker and his golden ears.

elxicano wrote: But in short... I would say that in your case, the answer is no. Sampling from CD's that are already at 44.1 and MP3's that are much, much much lower...

most mp3's will be 44.1 Khz as well, simply because they are usually compressed from CD source. You can actually have 48 Khz as well for mp3 (or 32)
Data rate is of course much lower than CD quality.

alex.the.forge wrote:

UKRuss wrote:Isn't 1ino's project all made from iported CD samples? i dont understand why you would want to change from 44.1, since they come from a CD, you can't add anything to it by then exporting at 88.2 surely?

when he starts adding effects it could make a difference - that's the point, the whole question here really comes down to whether the FX are improved enough to make it worth the bother. From memory I just found it annoying that I had to go back and re-render the track because the FX were suddenly too overbearing, I don't remember it making me jump out of skin with excitement at the quality. But like I said before, I probably just can't hear it.

Case in point, took my boy to see Iron Man 2 and every time glass broke he'd hold his ears and say how much he hated bits where they break glass because it hurts his ears

I actually said to my 8 year old -well the sound guys working on the film probably can't hear that high any more so they don't realise how loud it is, but you can because you still have perfect ears

true what they say, youth is wasted on the young. little fucker and his golden ears.

A fair point.

alex.the.forge wrote:dithering is for bit rate, not sample rate

okay actually it's for change in bith DEPTH, not rate.


bit depth = describes the number of bits of information recorded for each sample
bit rate (data rate) = the number of bits (of data) that are conveyed or processed per unit of time.
sample rate = defines the number of samples per second (or per other unit) taken from a continuous signal to make a discrete signal.
(thank you Wikipedia )

What Alex said, plus working 48 is better if you plan on doing anything with video with your tracks.

Secondly - Katz and others state that good enough SRC makes no difference going to 44.1 from higher bit rates, he quotes his stand alone Weiss SRC (which to be fair costs serious moolah) as being able to SRC 88.2 or 96 Khz to 44.1 or 48 with no difference (and this is a man who tests everything, doesn't just go on his instinct).

Go with what works for you and your system - yes, you will get (slightly) less track and plugin counts at 48 vs 44.1 but it shouldn't be a major impact, but going 88.2 or 96 and beyond will have a major impact on the amount of tracks and plugins you can use without frying your CPU. Which is why recording at 44.1/48 for audio and setting your project default to that but then rendering an 88.2 or 96 Khz stereo mix is recommended by mastering engineers, your audio will be upsampled (which won't improve it's quality but shouldn't decrease it either) but the higher sample rate gives an advantage on plugins to help with anti-aliasing. Bear in mind that from here, you will have to do SRC from the 88.2/96 back to 44.1 (if disk space permits you may want to keep a higher bit rate version around for DVD, DVD-A or possible forthcoming high bit formats) and dithering to 16/44.1 for CD.

Tone - you're right, need more booze

Tone Deft wrote: this is the crossroads. there's knowing where the flaws are and then there's knowing whether those flaws matter or not and understanding where the real weak points are in your signal chain.

IMO sample rate is much more important when you consider the entire signal chain, use what makes sense. use whatever requires the fewest SRC conversions, use what gives you the latency you can work with, common sense stuff. chasing down minute errors with sample rates is just silly, especially since there are a hundred other places you can improve your signal chain.

not to mention that just about every CD you've ever listened to has been a lowly 16 bit 44.1kHz recording and those can sound amazing!

bla bla bla bla bla...


read your books.. understand half.. preach what you think might be the truth..

fact is .. in soundsynthesis samplerate matters big time.. you easily can hear it.. try reaktor on 44 k and on 96k ...dont hear a difference? get another job...


ableton live is in many regards a syntheziser.. we have resonant filters.. we have synthesis plug ins.. the warp engine is a granular sampling module...

so explain me why the obvious benefits of higher samplerates for programs like reaktor shouldnt apply to ableton live?

Anyway.. people that just try it will hear easily...

more personal attacks, that's all you bring to the table. all you do is name drop, time and again your descriptions of audio are cringeworthy at best. you'd be well advised to not be the only guy name calling in a contentious thread, it makes you look really bad.

Tone Deft wrote:more personal attacks, that's all you bring to the table. all you do is name drop, time and again your descriptions of audio are cringeworthy at best. you'd be well advised to not be the only guy name calling in a contentious thread, it makes you look really bad.

what names do i call? reaktor? use your ears? tss..

you are the "bob katz has said" guy... a pretty lame try to give your missconceptions some weight..

Do you really dont hear a difference when running warped tracks in ableton on double samplerate?

astonishing... your hearing must be realy bad

TD never said don't use higher sample rates and he never suggested that if you had plugins that anti-aliasing isn't better at higher sample rates. He only quoted that for AUDIO (i.e. recording instruments, vocals etc) an idea samplerate would be around 50-60 Khz, which is pretty much the consensus of most industry experts.

Katz himself mentions about aliasing and plugins (and the advantages of using higher sample rates) and is not averse to high sample rates at all in case you were confused. Katz mastered the world's first DVD-A disc at 24/96 and worked on high sample rate converters before most of of the industry had changed to digital, back in the late 80s.

Totally unwarranted attack 3phase ... and by the way, it's not just Reaktor I gave an example with Guitar Rig and even many of the other plugins around including Sonalksis's plugin range, which are 64 bit double precision and internally use 96 or 192 Khz samplerates, etc.

Audio however doesn't suffer from aliasing effects by using 44.1 or 48 Khz. These capture beyond what the human can hear (well 48 Khz does but most people can't hear above 16 or 17 Khz and 44.1 captures up to 22 Khz). There's been arguments that certain instruments which produce complex harmonics, such as a trumpet, benefit slightly. Test it for yourself and choose your own best solution is the answer.