Which Sample Rate do you most commonly use when recording?

Discussion in 'Converters / Interfaces' started by DonnyThompson, May 27, 2015.

?

Which Sample Rate do you most commonly use when recording?

  1. 44.1

    47.1%
  2. 48

    23.5%
  3. 88.2

    11.8%
  4. 96

    17.6%
  5. 192

    5.9%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

  1. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    Yes, I know what you meant. You are asking and wondering the same thing as me.
     
  2. niclaus

    niclaus Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    Burbank, CA, USA
    Home Page:
    I just tried something.
    Opened a 96k session, export some files @44.1, reimported them in the same session @96k (so two SRCs in the box), flip the polarity, and i get a null... Not what i expected...
     
  3. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    Spot on.


    I've done extensive test in all this, built an incredible mixing system so I am pretty confident I have a good handle on what is worth doing or not. Capturing to something like a DSD recorder is cool but nothing like mixing into the capture DAW. Having a mastering DAW on the capture side be as truthful as possible is the ultimate mind blow.
    NOTE: "mastering" does not mean mastering, it means better summing ;) .
    The other critical component is the monitoring system must be connected to the capture DAW DA. If not, you are summing and mixing rather blind.
     
  4. vibrations1951

    vibrations1951 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Location:
    hodgdon, me
    Chris, I don't want to derail this great discussion but I've been itching to know if you do the majority of your mixing on DAW 1 and then just touch up with DAW 2? My guess is that it depends upon each mix and the options are endless.
    Sorry for butting in.
     
  5. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    You are most definitely NOT derailing the thread, its only getting better! Because you are entering this approach, you are already asking advanced question that I look forward to answering more and more.

    I do ALL my mixing on DAW 1. DAW 2 is where I monitor DAW1 from. DAW 2 is the sum, where I analyze mixes, create space, use spacial effects, M/S process, export and more. DAW 2 is everything involved in what your mastering section is about.

    DAW 1 master section is disabled.
     
  6. vibrations1951

    vibrations1951 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Location:
    hodgdon, me
    OK great! This is a big help. That is how I'm approaching things right now. Monitoring off DAW2 while I mix on DAW 1. From what little I've had a chance to try mixing so far it just seems easier this way.??? Maybe easier is a poor choice of words but it's the bottom line for me. Easier to hear, easier to make changes, easier to hear those changes. I haven't done any finishing with DAW 2 yet but I will. Baby steps for me right now...havin' a ball!
    Namaste
     
  7. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Location:
    Boston, Massachusetts
    Home Page:
    I've heard the results of uncoupled daws on stuff I'd mixed down differently. It's hard to accrue data on 'sounds better to me'. My line of thinking is I know for sure (as anything can be) it isn't going to be worse provided my system is specd nicely. So I'm incorporating the daw 2 as a necessary part of my new digs.

    I could be way off but I think null testing would be more revealing if we were talking linear recording formats? Just thinking out loud, silently thru text.
     
  8. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    As an example:
    I would use null testing to compare 1 DAW mix to a 2 DAW. Check converters and transparencies.
    To hear what an analog product did in a mix.

    In some cases, more for just testing and learning about stuff... , you of course have to be taking the analog pass into consideration. This would be similar to saying, I'm used to my bed, what does this sheet feel like now.
     
    kmetal likes this.
  9. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Location:
    Boston, Massachusetts
    Home Page:
    Doesn't the analog pass inherently make the waveforms slightly different? Or I guess what I'm asking is shouldn't it?
     
  10. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    Yes! Which can be a good change. But, you can still compare in ways that are beside the change.

    Which is what i meant by saying
    "I know what my bed feels like"
    Bed=the core of the pass (hybrid summing system) before added gear or colour is added.

    Which is where transparent summing excels. You can always add colour.

    Being said, Im now well versed on what "I want" as "my sound" to a point I am going for the Folcrom and Millennia m-2b as my colour (pass of choice).

    Until my new rig arrives, this is still speculation.
    I look forward in sharing what I'm talking about.
     
    kmetal likes this.
  11. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    What a thrill seeing all the interest in this now. Its so awesome.
     
    kmetal likes this.
  12. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Location:
    Boston, Massachusetts
    Home Page:
    So does the null show anything qualitative? Are you able to 'see' which passes 'sound' better? To my thinking, a sample based system just has to hit the right 'dots'. so as long as the extremes were met, the points in between are averaged or thrown out? Similar to a median line on a scatter plot?

    I'm curious to hear from Boulder and mr ease, and people who are fans of the null test, if they can hear a difference they can't see, or see a difference they can't here. In they're repspective listing areas.
     
  13. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    Good questions.

    Visual and auditory combined help each other. Example, I may use a visual editor of a plugin graph on the Capture DAW to pin out all the freq I see and hear in something until I hear no more can be added or subtracted to get a null.

    Analog is not constant and you can hear this when you try and null something. No two captures are the same. Uncoupling is even less., which is a good or bad thing. Which is why you ultimately want good converters, a good summing console and good monitoring DA. You will at some point want to learn more about what you are doing, not be mixing through a bunch of swinging products screwing with you all once. This is why people say, once ITB, stay ITB.
    So if you are the daring individual who goes OTB, this is why I start with transparent gear and add colour after. At least thats the idea anyway. Some of us already know what we want and some of us never get the chance to even know what this is all about.
    In my case, I have now moved into a more personal way of mixing. A Folcrom and m-2b are my next journey. If this doesn't work, then I will just stick with 2 DAW's and no gear in between at all. Racks of gear is behind me now but a very specific tone and another Bricasti might be exactly what I want.

    When we use analog in a chain, (API 2500, MEQ-5, API 5500 etc) the analog can fool you into thinking its actually creating space when in fact its fooling you because of some inconsistent phase swinging, thus sounding like its wider.
    To find these or demystify something you are wondering about, or emulate something you really like, using a graphic EQ to pin the remainders of something you think is an attribute, soon becomes apparent if you can find out why its doing what it is, in a pass. More so than not... the analog pass is actually shifting something and when you start stacking analog gear, you also are stacking randon swinging which imho, takes a good thing and makes it worse. (less is more) :love: makes a tighter bigger mix to my ears.
    All this may seem irrelevant to most people but anyone who is looking at analog gear, should know more about the gear than just taking a bunch of gearslut opinions on something.
    A 2 DAW system opens up new ways of listening. Our business is all about listening, not guessing. When you actually discover how a lot of expensive gear, or cheap for that matter plays in your chain, it gives you a whole new respect for less is more and where to use a tool (plug-in or hardware) in a chain. Its a big topic but in a nut shell, I love being able to hear and sometimes see what gear does rather than just saying I like it.

    To reach a bit more into hardware... The BAX LPF is pretty damn important as the last piece in a "busy" chain or mix. Why? Its really easy to push high freq that effect the AD (round trip or DAW2 capture). When you strap on a LPF and stop those ultra freq from passing through to the capture DAW, the mids sound straighter and warmer, more upfront. This is actually why Chris Muth put those filters in there. I get it now. Which I now hold off on adding high freqs in the mix. And even better, why I look for phase issue way ahead so I'm not trying to export them at the finish line. ;)
    When you help your AD like this, the mix seems to export better as well, which takes us back to the OP.. I would never have discovered this with such conviction had I not done some isolation tests between one mix to another, in a 2 DAW system.

    My list goes on.
    During this process I have learned how powerful my DAW really is, and how important it is to hear those changes I was missing before. It took $100,000 worth of mixing and mastering gear to learn I can do it ITB for thousands less. 2 DAW's makes it way more fun and interesting. Plus you can track HD and never have to bounce again. That is, if you don't want to.
     
    kmetal likes this.
  14. niclaus

    niclaus Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    Burbank, CA, USA
    Home Page:
    Yes, right, but at least the null testing is telling me the SRC in PT does not degrade the audio quality in a horrid manner.

    I will test the 2 DAWs conversion tomorrow and i will let you know what i hear.
     
  15. DonnyThompson

    DonnyThompson Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Location:
    Akron/Cleveland, OH
    Home Page:
    What is the corner frequency you usually use for this?
     
  16. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    24 hz low , 18 khz top but what ever sounds right on the low.
     
  17. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    You may be attempting to be trying something Dave is doing or what I do. Dave and I are doing it different. I'm wondering which?

    what I do.

    procedure
    • track something on DAW1 at 96k SR then bounce down one version to 44.1. Capture it also on an uncoupled DAW2 pass at 44.1 and compare the two 44.1 versions. If they null you are not doing this successfully.
    What do you hear?
     
  18. pcrecord

    pcrecord Quality recording seeker ! Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    Home Page:
    Are you saying you want to put the Millennia in the transfer chain from Daw1 to Daw2 ?
     
  19. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    Yes.
     
  20. niclaus

    niclaus Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    Burbank, CA, USA
    Home Page:
    Yes, that is what i am going to try tomorrow when i am at the studio.
    I Will let you know for sure.
    Thanks.
     
  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice