Great thought! Never tried this while doing my sampler stuff. My 2ct in general: the advantage of 192K is, that you will compensate for a simpler designed LP filter at the converter. Listen to an old-school Rompler from the 90s (Roland JV): They compensated the limited converters available with superior filter designs. You could play a string sample at C-2 and it sound just mighty.... Pitching down something like the pop sound will bring frequencies into the hearing range, that only bats could hear before... so this is a very cool effect. I've to consider that for sound design. Otherwise: The math is easy - you need exactly twice the sample frequency in order to replicate a sound perfectly. Each sample more is NOT improving the audio accuracy. If I am sitting in front of my DAW I'll be tricked into thinking that more is more, since I see stairs instead of a smooth curve. But the converters work different... Nyquest-Theorem who wants to read about it. Since I believe in math, I go for 48K. Using 192K on a regular bases can have nasty side effects: the noise level gets up and often there is alaising of ultrasonic sounds, which will be reflected back to the hearable range.
BTW it's not just Zoom Pretty much all standard video formats these days use audio at 48Khz So it there is any intention of working to video, then 48kHz is whet you will need.
My dude, please stop using horrible AI-generated garbage for your thumbnails. That crap diminishes your otherwise very good channel. Look closely at how inaccurately AI depicts keyboards. Has anyone ever seen keyboards in real life that look like the ones in a few of your videos’ thumbnails..? As a retired graphic designer and artist, I despise these horrendous images being shoved down our throats. Keep it real, good sir..! 😊
As a long-time Apple customer (and a former citizen within the EU - I live in the UK), this doesn’t make the slightest difference to me. I trust Apple so I will continue to trust their platforms rather than risk 3rd party stores and payment methods. This situation just highlights the irrelevance of EU authorities who love to wield what little real power they have to harass big targets like Apple, just as they did with Lightning connectors and ‘standardising’ power adapters (which is a million miles away from being standardised across all electronic devices). Oh, and they weren’t voted into power and it isn’t their money paying for these irrelevant endeavours… (and I voted to Remain!).
it never ceases to amaze me how genius some of the developers are at a lot of these daw companies. the algorithm that makes this happen is crazy complex. to double the sample rate of a file and not have it go up an octave. crazy crazy big brain algorithm.
at 192 u have more data points = more data which means a higher resolution. bare in mind that the higher the sample rate the lower the lantency as well
With my Mac Studio Ultra, the higher sample rates don’t help enough with latency to justify using it all of the time… since the latency is always so reliably low.
I remember the Synclavier back in the 80s at 192k so pitching down sounds amazing
So good!
Cats and dogs will benefit as will bats.
Do a test with reverbs and delays, you should really hear a difference between higher and lower sample rates.
Great thought! Never tried this while doing my sampler stuff.
My 2ct in general: the advantage of 192K is, that you will compensate for a simpler designed LP filter at the converter. Listen to an old-school Rompler from the 90s (Roland JV): They compensated the limited converters available with superior filter designs. You could play a string sample at C-2 and it sound just mighty....
Pitching down something like the pop sound will bring frequencies into the hearing range, that only bats could hear before... so this is a very cool effect. I've to consider that for sound design.
Otherwise:
The math is easy - you need exactly twice the sample frequency in order to replicate a sound perfectly. Each sample more is NOT improving the audio accuracy. If I am sitting in front of my DAW I'll be tricked into thinking that more is more, since I see stairs instead of a smooth curve. But the converters work different... Nyquest-Theorem who wants to read about it. Since I believe in math, I go for 48K.
Using 192K on a regular bases can have nasty side effects: the noise level gets up and often there is alaising of ultrasonic sounds, which will be reflected back to the hearable range.
BTW it's not just Zoom Pretty much all standard video formats these days use audio at 48Khz So it there is any intention of working to video, then 48kHz is whet you will need.
My dude, please stop using horrible AI-generated garbage for your thumbnails. That crap diminishes your otherwise very good channel. Look closely at how inaccurately AI depicts keyboards. Has anyone ever seen keyboards in real life that look like the ones in a few of your videos’ thumbnails..? As a retired graphic designer and artist, I despise these horrendous images being shoved down our throats. Keep it real, good sir..! 😊
As a long-time Apple customer (and a former citizen within the EU - I live in the UK), this doesn’t make the slightest difference to me. I trust Apple so I will continue to trust their platforms rather than risk 3rd party stores and payment methods. This situation just highlights the irrelevance of EU authorities who love to wield what little real power they have to harass big targets like Apple, just as they did with Lightning connectors and ‘standardising’ power adapters (which is a million miles away from being standardised across all electronic devices). Oh, and they weren’t voted into power and it isn’t their money paying for these irrelevant endeavours… (and I voted to Remain!).
In my system, Phase Plant distorts at a high sample rate, as well as Apple loops.
it never ceases to amaze me how genius some of the developers are at a lot of these daw companies. the algorithm that makes this happen is crazy complex. to double the sample rate of a file and not have it go up an octave. crazy crazy big brain algorithm.
at 192 u have more data points = more data which means a higher resolution. bare in mind that the higher the sample rate the lower the lantency as well
With my Mac Studio Ultra, the higher sample rates don’t help enough with latency to justify using it all of the time… since the latency is always so reliably low.
@@LogicProLife ok. thats cool