[Popsyche]

Originally Posted by JBroll

Have you actually tried a direct comparison between the two? I shut the fuck up right after doing that, after making the mistake of arguing somewhere else that higher sample rates could help. Took two identical sources, one through a condenser and the other through a dynamic, into the DAW, ran them through an EQ and a compressor, and then yanked the 88.2 down to 44.1. I set the two next to each other and flipped a phase switch... volume was so low compared to the original it would be practically impossible to know it was there - I could record myself saying "I don't like Mother Teresa" at that volume and not have people try to throw hammers at me. And I was using budget gear - Audiophile 2496, hand-built preamp, i5, borrowed AT condenser, stock Reaper plugins.

So my argument would be from actually using the technology you have to try it out, not showing off my recordings. This isn't condescending bullshit, this is sarcasm. Further, there's a much bigger resource cost behind 88.2 or 96 that could be put to use on better processing.

Jeff

Jeffy-boy, You are by far one of the most intelligent folks on this forum, but you have a little growing to do socially. I can see that you have hit a raw nerve with several Mods here, which will do you no good in the long run.

Arguing about a current recording practice as done by the folks that make a big living at it is somewhat futile. They know what works well and they do it. We, on the budget side, can emulate them if, as you put it, have the resources. Also, tell me more about this handbuilt mic-pre.

The other side of the coin is that without people like you always challenging the norm, there would be no advancements. In this instance, I think you need to research a little more into why they use different sampling rates before you reach such a steadfast conclusion.

Also, your sarcasm may be better directed in a part of the forum where we will all enjoy it, and not a technical thread like this one.




















































Dickbag! (J/K)

[Chris]

Originally Posted by JBroll

Have you actually tried a direct comparison between the two?

Yes, I have.

I shut the fuck up right after doing that, after making the mistake of arguing somewhere else that higher sample rates could help. Took two identical sources, one through a condenser and the other through a dynamic, into the DAW, ran them through an EQ and a compressor, and then yanked the 88.2 down to 44.1. I set the two next to each other and flipped a phase switch... volume was so low compared to the original it would be practically impossible to know it was there - I could record myself saying "I don't like Mother Teresa" at that volume and not have people try to throw hammers at me. And I was using budget gear - Audiophile 2496, hand-built preamp, i5, borrowed AT condenser, stock Reaper plugins.

Glad it worked for you.

So my argument would be from actually using the technology you have to try it out, not showing off my recordings.

Since the end result is, in fact, a recording, and you're pretty vocal about the issue, one would gather that instead of saying "Andy Sneap does blah blah because he rules", you'd post up an A/B. Since I've never heard anything you've recorded, all I hear is you being condescending and namedropping as usual without any real evidence to back up your claims.

This isn't condescending bullshit, this is sarcasm. Further, there's a much bigger resource cost behind 88.2 or 96 that could be put to use on better processing.

The limits set by your recording workstation don't have a thing to do with whether or not one is better than the other. Buy more ram.

[Drew]

Originally Posted by JBroll

That's where it was... I know this whole recording an album thing is supposed to take a while, but there are much better ways of procrastinating than blaming things on "I used a sample rate that made no sense and now my mixes all have downsampling herpes..." and trying to deal with bullshit like that.

Oh come on, dude. Don't be a moron. When exactly did you see me bitch about the negative effects of downsampling? Please don't stick words into my mouth, especially if you're going to be an asshole about it.

My issue with the Presonus was simpley that changing sampling rates was a MANUAL process. The M-Audio drivers allow it to support all sampling rates it's compatable with at the same time. The Presonus needs to have the sampling rate manually selected through its drivers, and then when you've made this selection, it will ONLY support that sampling rate. This means if I want to change sampling rates, I have to do so twice - on the Firepod driver menu, and then within Sonar. It's simply less user friendly than having to only select once.

I didn't even open the who can of worms that is the audio impact of different sampling rates. Since you obviously look up to Sneap, I'll simply say that his comment about higher sampling rates not making as much of a difference for metal due to the relative lack of dynamic range makes a lot of sense to me, but since I don't really play metal and DO play around a lot more with dynamics than, say, the latest Nevermore album does, I fail to see what that has to do with me.

If you want to have a thoughtful, intelligent discussion about sampling rates, I'm all ears. However, if when I point out that one peice of hardware I have is less user friendly than another in one particular respect, and you take that to mean something entirely different and then make snide, immature, and insulting comments about it, I'm going to tell you to go to hell.

[Drew]

Also, color me interested in your homemade pre, too. My limited experience is that a preamp makes a more immediately noticeable difference than the sampling rate, that's augmented as you start stacking tracks on top of each other, for some reason. I noticed my mixes immediately began sounding a little more clear when I grabbed a Presonus Bluetube, and while it could have been I was simply getting better, I suspect part of it is just that the pre really helps.

[Matt Crooks]

I've done tests of 44.1 and 48 and have decided to go 44.1 for everything. Since it all gets mastered to 44.1 anyway, and since I don't hear any real differences, it's not worth the extra resources. FWIW, Division's Trinity was recorded at 48, and the new Pharaoh Be Gone was recorded at 44.1.

I have not done an A/B of 44.1 vs. 88.2 but I don't have enough of a system (PT HD3) to support 88.2 at my track counts (> 60) and plug in counts (>150) so it wouldn't matter anyway.

[Drew]

Again, my comment was solely based on how much of a pain in the ass it is to switch sampling rates, and not on the relative merits of either.

[Matt Crooks]

Originally Posted by Drew

Again, my comment was solely based on how much of a pain in the ass it is to switch sampling rates, and not on the relative merits of either.

I was just contributing to the thread derail, that is all

[Drew]

Fair enough.

[JBroll]

I'm just going to stop with the sample rate bullshit. I'm sorry, it struck a nerve with me when Nick posted the same stuff everyone hears everywhere as if I didn't know a damned thing about recording... if that's how you want to use your resources, fine, but if your stuff sounds godly at 88.2 and amateur at 44.1 you probably have some bigger problem with your chain than the sample rate (probably those same tone-gremlins that make solid state amps sound bad just because they don't have tubes)... anyway, nevermind.

And the sample rate thing was just joking around, somehow I'm coming across as hostile when I have no intentions of doing so... gotta figure that fucker out.

Anyway, as for the handbuilt preamp... I've been tinkering with electronics for about as long as anyone has trusted me with a breadboard, and when I got seriously into audio engineering a few years back I started looking into preamps. I've studied and modded guitar pedals as long as I've been playing guitar, so I just started adapting some things from there and reading stuff out of electrical engineering books. I have had far too many of them, and wound up giving away or selling almost all of them, but if you want some schematics I can send them over your way. I intend to start building and selling them off at some point, but I haven't had the time yet... already have a bit of a waiting list at Sneap's place, I'm working on it.

The preamp is going to be very important... but I personally prefer to have the preamp do as little as possible to the sound. The way I see it, if I want to change the way something sounds I can do it in the DAW with much more control and no risk of having it tracked wrong in the first place, so that's what I look for in designs.

Jeff

[Drew]

I'm with you 99% of the way there, dude. The one exception I'll make is by way of analogy - I REALLY want one of those "Green Bullet" harmonica mics. Why? Because they sound like shit, if you want to talk abotu fidelity.... But that lo-fi vibe they have sounds fucking badass. I could see it working awesome on acoustic slide licks, for instance...

Likewise, a very transparent pre is definitely the way to go, if you're limited to just one. However, in an ideal scenario, I'd love to have pro-quality mic pres for every input I have, but also have a couple odd, funky ones kicking around too for more "effect" sort of tracks. Sure, you can do a lot with plugins, but I've got a little bit of sonic anarchist in me too, you know?

I'd ask to see the schematics, but there's no way in fuck I'd be able to build one, as I have the soldering abilities of a medium-rare steak. I was just kind of curious.