Hot answers tagged

3

metal, glass, chimes, bells, that sort of thing. super high screechy stuff is the only stuff that really makes any sound up there. alternatively try contact mics and electrostatic mics


3

The point of over sampling is not about hearing frequencies above 20k. The point of over sampling is to make it easier for the filters to filter everything out above the nyquist frequency. When you sample at lower sampling rates such as 44.1 or 48 the quality of the filter matters more. So if you record with an amazing ad converter with a really expensive ...


2

For pitch shifting down you need more than a 0 - ∼22.05kHz bandlimited signal to try to maintain some highs in the downpitched version. For digital recording you need more than 44.1kHz total sampling rate for 1. Making all gear-related conversion and input/output stage signal processing so that audible problems aren't induced to the audible range or the ...


2

I did 192 recordings for a extreme pitched down Vocals one time. It was just a test, on what is going on in the upper frequency spectrum. The result was something between artefacts and noise :D. So its more of a playground thingy. Where 192k is very important for sound quality -> if you use distortion or amp simulation. There, the higher frequencies fold ...


1

If you import a 192 kHz audio file in a 44.1 kHz session, the imported audio file will be downsampled. You actually loose information. Exporting this 44.1 kHz session at 192 kHz will use an oversampling algorithm to recreate missing samples. So you actually loose information, if that's what you mean by quality, when going through this workflow. Is it really ...


1

I'll record 24/48 for ambiences, 24/96 for most fx that I'm going to manipulate later.


1

I very rarely go outside of 24 bit 96k recording. For the most part, nothing interesting happens up above 48kHz anyway. I'll go to 192 for things like contact mics, electrostatic recordings, or metallic things like bells. Other than that 96k works great for me.


1

Good question! There are already some good answers here, and the one I thought of first and foremost was bats and whales, crickets, grasshoppers and cicadas, but for some really interesting sounds I'd give it a go at the city during rush-hour! As central as possible, and everything from crowds, to footsteps, to kids, to - and this is something of a favorite ...


1

Hydrophones tend to create brittle, high-frequency-rich sounds in water. Pitching those down can yield fun results and bring back some low frequency tones. But honestly, at 192kHz, anything you record will be utterly transformed once slowed down enough. I can guarantee you'll run out of time rather than recording sources and sonic elements.


1

Depends entirely on what you need. Recording at 192 will be much more useful for time-stretching or pitch-shifting afterwards (as will recording at 32bit), rather than being 'noticeably' improved (cue arguments!). I've always found it useful to go through rooms in the house and think of every sound you'd need in a scene. Kitchen for example, has so many. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible