Re: Is there a particular type of elitism that assert 44.1kHz is the best kind of sample rate

Tue, 04 Jul 2023 13:59:41 -0700

There's this video by Dan Worrall / Fabfilter about higher sample rates. 44.1k/48k is too small of a difference to really be noticeable, it's more about things like 44.1k vs 88.2k.


Basically a higher sample rate will push most aliasing to happen outside the audible range, which makes it easier to filter those artifacts. But doing your entire mix at a higher sample rate can lead to a wider signal bandwidth for intermodulation distortion to occur in, which will cause artifacts in the audible range. So the most effective way to mix, if you're specifically worried about avoid aliasing and IMD, is per-plugin over sampling. Upsample by 2x or 4x, do your nonlinear processing, filter everything above 22k, downsample back to the session's native sample rate.

Or basically, you want your audio bandwidth to be as much as you need and not more.

-Neil 

On Jul 4, 2023, at 16:43, Yisheng Jiang <[email protected]> wrote:

Kevin that’s a very good point about alignment with film, in fact I’m now 100% convinced 48k is superior 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 4, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Kevin Dixon <[email protected]> wrote:


I don't know what you're referring to in the subject, but 44.1khz is just a left over standard, picked for convenience with existing mediums. 48k is more convenient for film use, since it aligns evenly with 24fps. But that's also an irrelevant medium at this point!

The Red Book was the initial standard for compact disc digital audio


On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 12:41 PM Yisheng Jiang <[email protected]> wrote:
i've heard of Nyquist, but who's Redbook Gang?

On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 9:54 AM Kevin Dixon <[email protected]> wrote:
Nyquist and The Redbook Gang 

On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 9:48 AM Yisheng Jiang <[email protected]> wrote:
Sent from my iPhone

Reply via email to