16/44.1k has more BASS than 24/88.2k ??? Why?

I made some sample tests over the weekend to try to figure out at which rate I want to sample with, and I'm a bit puzzled at my findings. Turntable -> Rane mixer -> M-Audio Delta 66 -> Peak ->Toast CD was the chain. All files were recorded in Peak. When I made the 24-bit files at different khz rates, I was careful to also use Peak to down-convert them to CD specs, because there was a difference between Peak & Toast's internal conversion. I really think I thought of everything with regards to putting the samples on equal ground.

Anyway, I found that...

- 16-bit, 44.1Khz - the sound was not quite as "wide" as the 24 bit files, but the kick drum, bass guitar, and even the snare sounded markedly more full and punchy. The bass line could be heard un-interrupted pulsing at the bottom.
- 24-bit, 44.1Khz - the sound was a bit "wider" as I said, and a good touch clearer in the high end. But the lack of "energy" was also noticable. The kick drum and bass diminished even though they were technically still there. The sound wasn't as "connected" feeling.
- 24-bit, 48k - my ears couldn't tell a diff....I really couldn't. It was too close to 24/44 so I sort of mentally eliminated it from the tests eventually.
- 24-bit, 88.2Khz - This is as good as my sound card will do, and I had to have a 1024 buffer to do it. The sound was noticably the "widest" and also a "deepness" started to become apparent. But still, when compared to the 16/44.1 file, it really didn't sound as nice in the bass area, even though it was nicer in the mids and highs, and it was def wider.

I've wondered why the Akai MPC's (except for the 4000) are all at 16-bit/44.1Khz, and these machines are much-loved in Hip-Hop of course, and 100 out of 100 people claim that drums sound better through them....is it something to do with the sample rates??

I was theorizing (scary I know) that maybe the big blocky pieces of 16-bit data actually add a synthetic component to bass waves that make them sound even punchier? I've got a 12-bit S-950 sampler, and the sample disk that came with it (Akai Soundset) has EXTREMELY punchy, in your gut, sort of sounds.

o.k. sorry for rambling here...but does anyone ever sample at 2 different rates and then layer them later? (for drums etc.)

thanks for listening.

G4 Dual 500, 1.75GB RAM, LaCie D2, Mac OS X (10.4.8), Logic Pro 7.2.3, Delta66, JV1080, S950, Serato Scratch, 2xTechnics, TTM56, Avalon737,Aphex 204, misc. guitars, mixers etc. etc.

Posted on Jan 2, 2007 1:52 PM

Reply
17 replies

Jan 4, 2007 1:20 PM in response to Bryan Day

Obviously, the 16/44.1 file didn't need
anything.


Er... I'm a bit puzzled here... Did you start off
with the Higher Bit depth/Sample rates and
resample/dither down to the lower ones? Or the other
way round?


Yes, on 3 out of the 4 files, I recorded at higher bit/depth, and then dithered them down to 16/44.1 to put on the CD. But one of the files was recorded at 16-bit/44.1 to begin with, so it needed no resampling or dithering down.

Hope I'm not stating the obvious here, but surely the
16/44.1 would be the file that would have required
dithering (from the 24bit version).


Hopefully my answer above clarifies this?

p.s. my APLOGIES to all for not knowing how to use this forum correctly...I'm getting confused on which replies came when etc. lol

Jan 4, 2007 1:30 PM in response to jord

My take on the dithering was based on an assumption
that your source files would have sounded similar,
sonically, prior to burning. Hopefully, that is the
case.


Yes, that is the case Jord. In my case, the 'source' was a vinyl record. I actually recorded a drum break 4 seperate times, with different record settings that I mentioned. I was as careful as possible (to my knowledge) with regards to my sample rate settings, and where things were being converted, because the whole point of the test for me was to figure out what effect these settings would have in the real world.

So I didn't just take 1 file, and resave it as 4 different versions...each of my 4 files are uniquely recorded at their settings.

..and all 4 files sounded extremely similar in all listening environments...so I'm not talking anything dramatic here...just slight differences between the files that you have to listen to carefully to hear. I used my surround system to test just because it has better bass than my actual music monitors.

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

16/44.1k has more BASS than 24/88.2k ??? Why?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.