7 ms·
> The encoder was mainly optimized for 48Khz audio. Get over it. It's 2026, resampling is free, 48Khz is the standard. 44.1Khz will work, and so will 96Khz but
by superzazu 3mo ago
> The encoder was mainly optimized for 48Khz audio. Get over it. It's 2026, resampling is free, 48Khz is the standard. 44.1Khz will work, and so will 96Khz but use 48Khz if you want the best quality.
Is 48kHz really the standard nowadays?
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- TheChaplain 3mo ago48kHz has been the recommended setting with Premiere Pro as long as I can remember. 44.1kHz, isn't that what lameMP3 uses as default?
- williadc 3mo agoIt's what CDs use, so it would make sense for mp3 encoders to follow suit.
- asveikau 3mo agoI know the opus codec assumes everything is 48kHz and will resample inputs to that.
- atoav 3mo agoMore or less. Streaming is often done with 48, video content has ben 48 for a while now, so unless you still produce content for CDs it is the standard. 44100 Hz had reasons no longer really needed (storing audio in 3 samples per line in VHS: 490 lines × 3 samples × 30 GPS = 44100 sample/s). Qualitywise both are more than enough snd 99.99% of people would not be able to tell it apart in a blind test. Higher sample rates than 48kHz only needed when you want to pitch down ultrasonic recordings (of whales, bats and other such animals for example). Aside from this higher than 48 kHz sample rates may have only downsides, like increased size and potential distortion in the ultrasonic frequency range that has sidebands in the audible range. Yet there is a persistent, but unscientific "more-is-better"-crowd in the HiFi-sector.
- duped 3mo ago> Higher sample rates than 48kHz only needed when you want to pitch down ultrasonic recordings (of whales, bats and other such animals for example). There are numerous use cases for higher sample rates that go beyond this but it's hard to talk about it without starting flame wars filled with junk science.
- zamadatix 3mo agoSay it or don't but "I have evidence otherwise but don't think I should say" is just as bad a flame war gateway as tempting the junk science audiophiles directly.
- skydhash 3mo agoI know that with oscilloscopes, it’s recommended to use 5x instead of nuquist 2x of the highest frequency you want to use., but the most reasonable argument I’ve heard for higher than 48kHz sampling is digital audio effects. But for the end result 48kHz is more than necessary. I can’t even hear any frequency above 17kHz.
- dcrazy 3mo agoYes, bit depth headroom is very useful for audio production to avoid aliasing. Pro DAWs support 96KHz.
- adgjlsfhk1 3mo agoyeah for real time signals higher frequency makes sense (very briefly before you fft and kill the high frequencies), but for stored signals nyquist is king.
- Aurornis 3mo ago> I know that with oscilloscopes, it’s recommended to use 5x instead of nuquist 2x of the highest frequency you want to use. For capturing analog signals, 2.5X is enough headroom. The 5X recommendation is probably for digital signals where the frequency refers to the baud rate, not the highest frequency coming through. A fast switching digital signal will have components with higher bandwidth than the fundamental. Using a higher multiple of samples (assuming the bandwidth is there) will let you see the shape of the waveform and rise and fall times better.
- izacus 3mo agoYes, pretty much all new hardware uses it as default output setting as well (by that I mean laptops, phones, smart speakers, etc.)
- xuhu 3mo agoFor one, audio transcription services that use Whisper will sample the input down to 16Khz mono first.
- legdoge 3mo agoAAC has a strange quirk that the window size is dependent on the sampling rate, thus requiring a complete psychoacoustics reoptimization of all encoder parameters for each sampling rate, since a 20msec window sounds very different than a 60msec window, to human ears. This was of course fixed in Opus.
- spider-mario 3mo agoBy just always using 48 kHz, from what I recall?
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- pipo234 3mo ago48kHz makes alignment between video and audio so much easier. (I.e.: Lip synchronization after edits)
- Joeboy 3mo agoI think the closest thing to an actual "standard" is AES5-2018, "Recommended practice for professional digital audio". Abstract: > A sampling frequency of 48 kHz is recommended for the origination, processing, and interchange of audio programs employing pulse-code modulation. Recognition is also given to the use of a 44.1-kHz sampling frequency related to certain consumer digital applications, the use of a 32-kHz sampling frequency for transmission-related applications, and the use of a 96-kHz sampling frequency for applications requiring a higher bandwidth or more relaxed anti-alias filtering. This revision further quantifies the preferred choices for higher sampling frequencies. Edit: From my personal perspective, 44.1kHz is a legacy minor annoyance
- daneel_w 3mo agoYes and no. It is the standard for audio in film, which explains the author's focus. But is the audio CD bigger and more "standarder" than DVD and Blu-Ray? I think they're equals, and I personally think this encoder only makes sense for video content. Given all the caveats the author mentions (in particular about the sample rate) I would steer clear from using it when ripping CDs.
- lesscraft 3mo agoPretty much all DACs run at 48Khz by default due to operating systems picking it as a sane default.
- bpye 3mo agoPipewire will quite happily pipe through audio without resampling if it is the only source on a system. You can see this by running pw-top and using speaker-test with various sample rates.
- chronogram 3mo agoEven if it reports 44.1 it resamples internally to 48 in all hardware I've seen.