anybody ever tried this... recording your project @ a lower frequency than 44.1k?

im gonna try it myself in a sec. i already have a general idea of what it will sound like and given the right song it might even sound really dope...

just an idea, gimme a shout if anybody has rocked this idea b4... peace

Yeah, I think I have, and it sounded pretty crappy. But go ahead and try it.
I need to know, at what frequency and stuff do you guys record normally?

This is my 134th post...yessssss

i record at 44.1 because that is the highest frequency of a standard cd players output. i keep the bit rate at a float level when recording then master at 16 bit.

i use protools for the most part and i keep it @ 24/48k and bounce down to 16/44k....

the only time ive ever tried this was just messing around @ 8bits and that was the crappiest noise ive ever heard...i mean CRAPPY in ALL CAPS

phuck you

my bad

i completely forgot about your screen name man!!!

don't sweat it
how's your project going?

real slick man, the cat Audible, that im working with is puttin together a band @ the same time so there will be shows played combining things they come up with and the things we are working on as well. thanks for askin

Sp 1200 sample rate is 22k I think. Might be interesting. I always record at 24 bit/48 k. Then I just bit crush everything to shit anyways haha.

dither!

yeah i use dither in all my beats i just thought it might add a bit of warmth to it....


logically speaking the 44k is industry standard yet anything above 16k we cant hear or its starts to cause pain... funny right. plus 44.1k was determined buy sony/phillips when cds came about and really only apply to systems that can reproduce that entire spectrum which, ask any car audio competitor, but a system that can reproduce all those frequencies sounds like shyt. yet we still live by it


sorry for the rant...

actually most professionals still record at 44.1 and 16 bit, some are 96/24 for the headroom...there was a big discussion about this on gearslutz and most thought that dithering down did more to damage the sound than recording in 16/44.1 with great converters....plus you save more room on you HD...one of the plusses for 24 bit is using great 24 bit plug ins though

that makes more sense than anything. plus only so many stereos can play @ 24bit and those are a few home recievers and aftermarket car stereos @ above average costs.

Ey man they are completely different concepts

sampling rate of 44.1khz is different to an actual sound signal oscillating at frequency 44.1khz!

the sample rate defines how small the digital chunks of data are - because rather than record a smooth wave, in digital, you record a list of 'steps'

44.1khz sample rate means every 1 second of sound is split up into 44100 chunks of data.

This is why when you zoom right in on a waveform in a digital audio editor, it always at some point appears to become a series of 'steps' rather than a smooth line.

In 44.1khz, if you take a 1 second sample, that sample is made up of 44100 points... the number chunks of data though has no bearing on the pitch of the sample, unless you reduce the sample rate to something very very low. . like 4hz or something.. down at these kind of sample rates, your sample will basically start to represent a kind of randomised-square waveform.

The higher the sample rate, the closer you will get to having a truly smooth waveform, rather than one that steps - of course past a certain number of steps, you wont be able to hear it changing anyway.


The produceable frequency spectrum of a sound system is not to do with sampling rate though, just to do with pitch frequency..


sampling rate is a completely different kettle of fish, theyre both just measured in the standard generic measurement of cycles per second.

^^ good info, i probably wouldve stumbled acroos that soon as well, its been on my mind since i first posted and ive been researchi9ng it on down time.

but let me ask you this: have you heard the diff between 96k and 44?

just asking