What Sample Rate Do You Work In?

[Forceps]

44,1/ 24 works for me. I didn't know which was best when I started recording, so I checked some websites of great producers and studios, and most of them recommended 44,1/ 24.. so when it works for them, it definately works for me, haha!

 

[scorpio01169]

48 S/R, 24bit

 

[Soundlurker]

Ok, last night I did a quick test with 8505 and Boogex and came up with some pretty interesting results.
Download
Same inserts for all of the files, just different sample rates (44khz, 48khz and 192khz). I used r8brain with very high quality dithering to convert the 48 and 192 files to 44khz, 16.

Listening to the samples 44khz and 48khz I don't hear significant differences. The 192khz sample, however, slays the other two, IMO.

I'm just not sure it's because of the samplerate and not the playing. I can try the same experiment using one DI, but this would mean no difference in DI sound due to it being tracked in different samplerates. Still, I'm gonna give it go just to establish what makes more difference: playing, di samplerate or samplerate in which the vst is working.

edit: sorry for the lame playing (which I realised is ripped off Despised Icon)

 

[Soundlurker]

This time I recorded the di in 192/24, then I exported it (192/24). I added 8505 and boogex and exported the processed guitars in 192/24. Next I used r8brain to convert the di into 48/24 and imported that to a 48/24 project with the same inserts. I exported the processed guitars in 48/24. I used the same method for 44/24. Finally, I used r8brain to convert all of the processed guitar files into 44/16 and converted them to high-quality mp3.

Download

 

[Mutant]

Not a very big difference but still quite noticeable.

192 sounds best to me.

 

[georgekant]

If we say that there IS a difference in the sound I can definately say it is NOT worth it.

 

[Metaltastic]

Not worth what? Extra hard drive space? To some people, that's hardly an issue! (though I'm not one of 'em )

 

[Fox Mulder]

I get CPU dropouts at 88.2 or 96.

 

[Mutant]

I get CPU dropouts at 88.2 or 96.

Even with just 1 track ?

 

[Metaltastic]

DUUUUUUDE, Maamar, I fucking love that quote from the Manowar Hell on Earth Pt. 1 DVD in your sig, it always cracked me the up the way he said that so awkwardly It was in an interview on like Venezuelan TV, right?

 

["Evil" Aidy]

Using pictures and theoretical text is nice, but I made an audiovisual experience for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fImyo02uYk

This is a really interesting insight! I use Amplitube a lot! Are both of these tests with with high resolution settings etc selected within the preferences in amplitube and does your video show you using the entire chain in Amplitube i.e. Amp head right through to the cab simulator?

So if amp sims work better at higher sample rates, will the end result always end up sounding kinda muffled or lower quality as won't the tracks end up at 44.1 by the rime they get to CD anyway due to the downsampling?

My CPU starts taking a dump after 10 seconds of playing or so if I try 88.2 or 96, so I can't make up my mind whether I can hear any difference in sound, plus I'm using headphones too and bypassing the amplitube cabinet and using impulses in Boogex. I'm sure that makes a difference on my CPU load!

I've just tried Amplitube 2 on it's own with the built in cabinet enabled and indeed I could hear a difference in quality switching from 44.1 to 96. I still can't figure if there is a difference in sound though if you bypass the cabinet and use impulses instead in Boogex.

How would you go about getting the best quality sound out of this particular amp sim then? Track a DI in your normal project at 44.1khz then upsample the DI to a higher sample rate (96 for instance) and then "re-amp" (bounce) with the amp sim through a 96khz samplerate project selecting the output as a 44.1khz .wav file and then import that bounced track back into your normal 44.1khz project? Or again, would the samplerate change make it sound muffled?

Or to retain the quality would it be better to bounce the track without downsampling and then use a decent plugin like r8brain to change the sample rate?

 

[Mulder]

1 / 2822.4


(when I do classical)

 

[Pot]

Hey guys !

Many VST plugins dont oversample internally so going to 88200 really gives them a huge boost in quality.

Just check it yourself.

Which ampsims did u find out that benefited of a higher samplerate?

 

[Via Noctis]

I saw in a catologue that some word clocks go up to 384khz....

 

[John_C]

[quote="Evil" Aidy;8316227]This is a really interesting insight! I use Amplitube a lot! Are both of these tests with with high resolution settings etc selected within the preferences in amplitube and does your video show you using the entire chain in Amplitube i.e. Amp head right through to the cab simulator?

So if amp sims work better at higher sample rates, will the end result always end up sounding kinda muffled or lower quality as won't the tracks end up at 44.1 by the rime they get to CD anyway due to the downsampling?

My CPU starts taking a dump after 10 seconds of playing or so if I try 88.2 or 96, so I can't make up my mind whether I can hear any difference in sound, plus I'm using headphones too and bypassing the amplitube cabinet and using impulses in Boogex. I'm sure that makes a difference on my CPU load!

I've just tried Amplitube 2 on it's own with the built in cabinet enabled and indeed I could hear a difference in quality switching from 44.1 to 96. I still can't figure if there is a difference in sound though if you bypass the cabinet and use impulses instead in Boogex.

How would you go about getting the best quality sound out of this particular amp sim then? Track a DI in your normal project at 44.1khz then upsample the DI to a higher sample rate (96 for instance) and then "re-amp" (bounce) with the amp sim through a 96khz samplerate project selecting the output as a 44.1khz .wav file and then import that bounced track back into your normal 44.1khz project? Or again, would the samplerate change make it sound muffled?

Or to retain the quality would it be better to bounce the track without downsampling and then use a decent plugin like r8brain to change the sample rate?[/quote]


What matters is the sample rate the ampsim is being fed. Downsampling afterwards is after all the processing and therefore makes far less (if any) difference to the sound.

Increase you buffer sizes when working in higher sample rates! The latency gets halved when you double the sample rate, which means your system will take a dump coz it can't cope. If you're going from 44.1 to 88.2 double your buffers and it should be stable