# 48khz vs 44.1khz - old topic...



## Simon Ravn (Oct 10, 2011)

I am working on a project where my final delivered material has to be 48khz. So I thought I might as well be working in 48khz (maybe 96khz during mixing) right from the beginning.

However, I am not sure that will get me the best result, because it seems most sample libraries are recorded (or at least published) in 44.1khz 16 or 24-bit. So would it be better to work in 44khz, and only change sample rate at the very end? I would think that forcing the samplers to resample almost everything from 44khz to 48khz while composing and recording would result in a lot more SRC going on than by just converting from 44khz to 48khz at the end. Anyone ran any tests like this to figure out what would be best?


----------



## sin(x) (Oct 10, 2011)

I didn't do any tests, but as soon as a sample has its tuning corrected by even one cent in the patch, gets subjected to any kind of pitch modulation, or is stretched to adjacent keys, resampling will be involved. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the signal always passes through some kind of resampling algorithm in most software samplers, even in those cases where it's played back at its exact recording rate. Would be interesting to do a binary input/output comparison sometime. Anyway, I wouldn't worry about it if you don't notice a difference.


----------



## rpaillot (Oct 10, 2011)

I would convert at the very end of the process using "tweak head" algorythm of pro-tools for instance.

I never did any test, but I guess setting your project in 48 khz will involve real time resampling of any kontakt , play, vienna, sample library and doing that in real time will need more CPU power, so the algorythm used in most DAW is probably low quality in order not to use lot of CPU power.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 10, 2011)

rpaillot @ Mon Oct 10 said:


> I would convert at the very end of the process using "tweak head" algorythm of pro-tools for instance.
> 
> I never did any test, but I guess setting your project in 48 khz will involve real time resampling of any kontakt , play, vienna, sample library and doing that in real time will need more CPU power, so the algorythm used in most DAW is probably low quality in order not to use lot of CPU power.



Yup. Working at 48k in a project will be a bit of a fight I think. A good quality conversion at the end - job done.


----------



## jamwerks (Oct 10, 2011)

A bit of a fight?

I thought everybody (as I do) involved with cinema/TV worked at 48khz?


----------



## sin(x) (Oct 10, 2011)

Dunno. I don't claim there's a great advantage in quality, but I'm keeping all my projects at 48k native when the end product is for film or TV, and it's never given me any trouble.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 10, 2011)

jamwerks @ Mon Oct 10 said:


> A bit of a fight?
> 
> I thought everybody (as I do) involved with cinema/TV worked at 48khz?



Yes, TV / film post is exclusively 48k, but the music world has traditionally been 44.1k. Which means we - uniquely - get caught up in both! Working at 44.1 to final mix then converting just seems the least painful solution.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 10, 2011)

I now work at 48 pretty much all the time and convert to 44.1 later when I have to. If there is a difference in the way the samples sound, these tired old ears cannot hear it.


----------



## devastat (Oct 10, 2011)

This is highly speculative but to my understanding if you work on 48khz from the beginning, the effect plugins will have slightly more resolution to work with and thus the audio will be better quality (than if working in 44khz and converting into 48khz in the end).


----------



## Frederick Russ (Oct 10, 2011)

If your system is running along smoothly in 44.1k, I see no reason to want to change it honestly particularly since most samples (not all however) are usually recorded in 44.1k. Get yourself the best sample rate converter though for stem delivery - Audiofile Wave Editor has an excellent SRC (iZotope 64-bit resampling) with superb high ratings. 

Changing over to 48k, you might notice slightly different performance and/or behavior from your sample libraries as I believe they are resampling on the fly. A couple of times I noticed pitch differences in some of it. Many of my own projects are in 48k but there is little to no difference between 44.1 and 48 honestly. I think the bigger difference is 88.2 or 96k.


----------



## germancomponist (Oct 10, 2011)

Frederick Russ @ Mon Oct 10 said:


> ... Many of my own projects are in 48k but there is little to no difference between 44.1 and 48 honestly. I think the bigger difference is 88.2 or 96k.



Yes, the reason why sample library producer often work in 96 kHz / 32 bit float, or even higher resulution 192 or 384..... .

For those who do not believe, search here on VI, and you can find a cool example what Sinesamples had posted here last year or two years ago.... .


----------



## gsilbers (Oct 10, 2011)

everybody that works with 48k projects uses sample libraries that are 44.1. 

just work in 48k. dont do 96k or 192 or whatever. keep simple. keep all at 48k. 

there is aHUGE issue if you just convert your stems afterwards from 44 to 48 if its synced to picture. so just start and finish in 48k. if not youll get sync problems. 

there is almost no difference between 44.1 and 48. no one except bob katz maybe will tell the difference and there is a lot more things to worry about than the sonic difference between those 2 numbers. 

but there is a lot to worry about if you just convert 44.1 to 48 and not keep the same length.


----------



## germancomponist (Oct 10, 2011)

I also would work in 48 for film. 

My last post about the sound difference was written to Fredericks post (88,2 or higher vs 44,1)


----------



## madbulk (Oct 10, 2011)

I can't imagine what this would mean. But it's been said a couple of times here... why would there be big issues, LENGTH?!, with a conversion from 44.1 to 48 at the final stage?? I work at 24/44.1 and if someone wants 48, I throw it into Peak and change the sample rate. What's the problem?

Or do you mean problems if they try to do it in the video editor stage? 

If I create at 44.1 and deliver at 48, what could be problematic?


----------



## devastat (Oct 10, 2011)

Also some libraries are 48khz these days, Evolution Series World Percussion for example.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 10, 2011)

My opinion: set the session sample rate to 48 and get some sleep.

Whether you work at 44.1 and convert to 48 later or let the sampler do the conversion on the fly is incredibly unimportant. If you don't believe me, bounce a short cue and listen to it both ways (I did this years ago).

Yes it's true that there's always a difference between two files, regardless of what you do and even when there shouldn't be any difference. And there are little things that can add up to make a legitimate difference in clarity when you're dealing with digital audio - especially remembering to use dither when you go from 24- to 16-bit bounces - but in my opinion this isn't one of them.

There's also the small detail that we don't usually know the rate at which the samples were recorded. Or what if one library was recorded at high sample rates and another one wasn't?

It really isn't worth worrying about.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 10, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Oct 10 said:


> It really isn't worth worrying about.



Agreed re quality issues. But if most or all libs are 44.1, doesn't it put a little more CPU strain all round to be converting in real time to 48? If it doesn't and assuming any conversion is HQ, then yup it makes no practical difference whatsoever.


----------



## charlieclouser (Oct 10, 2011)

Always work with your DAW set to the sample rate of the delivery format. I am always at 48k for TV and film work and then if I release a CD of the score I convert to 44k at the mastering phase.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 10, 2011)

> But if most or all libs are 44.1, doesn't it put a little more CPU strain all round to be converting in real time to 48?



In a word, no.

Not even in the days when it was a good idea to turn off the menu bar clock to save CPU cycles.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 10, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Oct 10 said:


> > But if most or all libs are 44.1, doesn't it put a little more CPU strain all round to be converting in real time to 48?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Splendid! I should update my sig - "there's always - always - something more important to worry about than 24 bit, but 44.1k/48k sure isn't it".


----------



## zacnelson (Oct 10, 2011)

hahaha good call Guy!


----------



## gsilbers (Oct 10, 2011)

madbulk @ Mon Oct 10 said:


> I can't imagine what this would mean. But it's been said a couple of times here... why would there be big issues, LENGTH?!, with a conversion from 44.1 to 48 at the final stage?? I work at 24/44.1 and if someone wants 48, I throw it into Peak and change the sample rate. What's the problem?
> 
> Or do you mean problems if they try to do it in the video editor stage?
> 
> If I create at 44.1 and deliver at 48, what could be problematic?




it depends on how you do the conversion. seems the way you are doing it is working fine. 

but a 48k file will be a bit longer than the same file in 44.1k. 

you could try some test by importing duplicate files into your DAW, both at different sampling rates.

its common practice in post production audio to change the sampling rate when you want to change the length of an audio file =, for example if you want to go from NTSC to PAL which is a 4% difference in length or if you want to go from true 24/30 frames per seconds to drop frame which is 1% difference. 

and of course there is ways of changing the sampling rate without affecting the length (and/or pitch)


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 10, 2011)

Actually the one place you DON'T want to convert is the video editor. Hopefully it's better now, but Avid used to take a week and a half to convert a 30 second 44.1 to 48 clip on the timeline. It sounded fine, but by that time the editor and the production team had all gone on holiday.

Actually one more thought on this - Pyramix used to be bad at handling 44.1k in a 48k project - it would glitch and click and all sorts of things. In v6 (I think it was) it got better, but only in as much as it didn't click any more... it just played at the wrong speed! As a Pyramix-lover it pains me to say it, but this aspect of the DAW is hopeless. If other DAWs, VIs, samplers etc all manage this effortlessly with no CPU hit, I can't imagine what the problem was with Pyramix.


----------



## Synesthesia (Oct 11, 2011)

charlieclouser @ Mon Oct 10 said:


> Always work with your DAW set to the sample rate of the delivery format. I am always at 48k for TV and film work and then if I release a CD of the score I convert to 44k at the mastering phase.



+1

Film/TV is always at 48k - this is why all Spitfire libs are recorded at 96k and produced at 48k..


----------



## Simon Ravn (Oct 11, 2011)

Thanks for all your input, guys. It seems there is no agreement though - some think I should work in 44khz, some believe I should set it to 48. I changed it to 48khz recently, so I guess I'll just it be there - will also save me some sample conversion time at the end

Cheers,

Simon


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 11, 2011)

Simon Ravn @ Tue Oct 11 said:


> Thanks for all your input, guys. It seems there is no agreement though - some think I should work in 44khz, some believe I should set it to 48.



And *cough* some believe it really doesn't matter!


----------



## sin(x) (Oct 11, 2011)

Simon Ravn @ 2011-10-11 said:


> It seems there is no agreement though - some think I should work in 44khz, some believe I should set it to 48.



You're lucky we're not on Gearslutz, else you'd have to deal with “anything below 192k makes my ears bleed”, “it depends on your converters, your cables, your monitors, your room and your approach” and “if it's digital it's broken anyway, so who cares” as well.


----------



## dannthr (Oct 22, 2011)

Our ears won't hear a difference between the two--digital audio fundamentals.

Nyquist theory states we need two digital samples to make a sound, so your sonic fidelity or more accurately, your ability to recreate a wave form requires at least two samples. That means that your ability to reproduce a frequency is about 50% of whatever your sample rate is at. As the human hearing caps out at about 20Khz, we use sample rates over 40Khz.

Of course, we use 44.1k and 48k because of the number of scan lines during a television broadcast, it has nothing to do with audio fidelity after 40khz and it has everything to do with your video frame-rate.

Red-book CD audio adopted 44.1 because it was an existing standard when moving over to completely digital audio media.

Work however you like, just remember that up-sampling requires the generation of new sample material, so better to start high and go lower later on.


----------

