High-Resolution Playback reseting after every reboot

[M&M]

I've tried to gain a better music playback, following an article in MacWorld by changing the Format settings in Audio MIDI Setup to 48000.0 Hz and 2ch-24bits via the optical output on the Mac Pro.

But everytime I reboot the machine, I get to the default 44000,0 Hz but stays in the 2ch-24bits.

What gives?

This used to work before.

Has anyone the same problem?

Do you have a solution? Fix?

Thanks

 

[TheDoc]

I feel like this is the same issue as the speakers preferences being reset. Give this a go: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1050090/

 

[24Frames]

There is no discernible difference between a sample rate of 44.1kHz and 48kHz at either 16-bit or 24-bit resolution.

44.1kHz is used for music, 48kHz is used for music to picture (film and TV.

If you are recording you would use 44.1kHz for music, 48kHz for film and probably record with 24-bit resolution. However you might record at a higher sample rate, such as 96kHz 24-bit and down sample at the mastering stage to 44.1kHz 16-bit.

The sample rate is set by the software you are running, such as Apple's Logic Pro.

 

[goMac]

Don't use 48000.0hz. It's well well above the range of even the best of the best of human hearing, and I'm not even aware of any consumer material recorded that high.

As for 24 bit, I'm not aware of much consumer material in that either. If your receiver can't do 24 bit, it's not going to work anyway. It's probably not worth it either.

To respond to the above comment, the controls OP is referring to is for playback, not recording. But if he doesn't have the right gear he can't take advantage of these settings anyway.

If you're playing music you got off a CD or iTunes, none of this is going to do anything anyway. It's all mastered at 44.1khz in 16 bit.

 

[24Frames]

Don't use 48000.0hz. It's well well above the range of even the best of the best of human hearing, and I'm not even aware of any consumer material recorded that high.

You're confusing the sampling rate with the highest frequency that can be recorded or reproduced.

48kHz is the sampling rate. The sampling rate needs to be at least twice the frequency of the highest frequency to be recorded or reproduced from the samples.

 

[goMac]

You're confusing the sampling rate with the highest frequency that can be recorded or reproduced.

48kHz is the sampling rate. The sampling rate needs to be at least twice the frequency of the highest frequency to be recorded or reproduced from the samples.

Correct. Human hearing tops out at roughly 20 khz max. Therefore a sample rate of 44.1 khz is sufficient for any audio.

And, as I mentioned, any commercially available audio is only sampled at 44.1 khz anyway, so turning it up to 48khz isn't going to do anything for you.

You're much better off trying to get tracks encoded at a higher bitrate than messing around with all this snake oil.

 

[derbothaus]

Correct. Human hearing tops out at roughly 20 khz max. Therefore a sample rate of 44.1 khz is sufficient for any audio.

And, as I mentioned, any commercially available audio is only sampled at 44.1 khz anyway, so turning it up to 48khz isn't going to do anything for you.

You're much better off trying to get tracks encoded at a higher bitrate than messing around with all this snake oil.

Maybe for playback of mp3's only.
Generally this is not snake oil. I depends greatly on what you are doing or trying to do though. Most audio is sampled when recorded at 24-bit well over 44.1khz then dithered down for CD. I record usually at 88.2khz for music and 96khz for motion picture. x2 evenly so down sample uses even algorithms. Movie's use the 48khz audio and benefit from keeping the reproduction at the same or recording at 2x 96khz. I can definitely hear the difference between 44 and 88. Truly it is more important to have a better sound card than to worry about the onboard sample rates. They all suck and I probably would not be able to tell the difference on OS X standard card. On pro gear though you better believe it matters. It's like saying a 720p Flip camera gets that same results as a RED.

 

[goMac]

Maybe for playback of mp3's only.
Generally this is not snake oil. I depends greatly on what you are doing or trying to do though. Most audio is sampled when recorded at 24-bit well over 44.1khz then dithered down for CD. I record usually at 88.2khz for music and 96khz for motion picture. x2 evenly so down sample uses even algorithms. Movie's use the 48khz audio and benefit from keeping the reproduction at the same or recording at 2x 96khz. I can definitely hear the difference between 44 and 88. Truly it is more important to have a better sound card than to worry about the onboard sample rates. They all suck and I probably would not be able to tell the difference on OS X standard card. On pro gear though you better believe it matters. It's like saying a 720p Flip camera gets that same results as a RED.

Oh sure, if you have the source, it can make a difference, moreso the 24 bit than the 48 khz. It's why the option is there. Especially if you're editing and you need the quality to spare.

If you're listening to music that has already been mastered down to 44.1khz at 16 bit, it's not going to make a bit of difference. Best I've heard of is Beats which supposedly can enhance to 24 bit, which is a dubious claim at best.

I didn't see the OP mention anything about doing pro audio though, only that he was playing back music, so I'm assuming he's just playing MP3s or AACs.

 

[Jst0rm]

This happens to me. Very annoying. I ended up have the pref open up at start up so I can manually chane it back to 48khz. I have my personal rig use the clock from the macpro so if it is not 48khz then everything plays back slowly. I need to think about not having my Mac be the master clock.

 

[philipma1957]

Maybe for playback of mp3's only.
Generally this is not snake oil. I depends greatly on what you are doing or trying to do though. Most audio is sampled when recorded at 24-bit well over 44.1khz then dithered down for CD. I record usually at 88.2khz for music and 96khz for motion picture. x2 evenly so down sample uses even algorithms. Movie's use the 48khz audio and benefit from keeping the reproduction at the same or recording at 2x 96khz. I can definitely hear the difference between 44 and 88. Truly it is more important to have a better sound card than to worry about the onboard sample rates. They all suck and I probably would not be able to tell the difference on OS X standard card. On pro gear though you better believe it matters. It's like saying a 720p Flip camera gets that same results as a RED.

Correct

Oh sure, if you have the source, it can make a difference, moreso the 24 bit than the 48 khz. It's why the option is there. Especially if you're editing and you need the quality to spare.

If you're listening to music that has already been mastered down to 44.1khz at 16 bit, it's not going to make a bit of difference. Best I've heard of is Beats which supposedly can enhance to 24 bit, which is a dubious claim at best.

I didn't see the OP mention anything about doing pro audio though, only that he was playing back music, so I'm assuming he's just playing MP3s or AACs.

Also correct. Op would need gear like an Alesis masterlink 9600


http://www.alesis.com/masterlink


http://www.stereophile.com/hirezplayers/605

while this is older gear it was pretty much top of the line. A lot of newer gear id for MP3 and lessor sound quality. If you listen to good quality 88 or 96 sample rate recordings on good speakers you will hear the difference.

 

[derbothaus]

Best I've heard of is Beats which supposedly can enhance to 24 bit, which is a dubious claim at best.

I didn't see the OP mention anything about doing pro audio though, only that he was playing back music, so I'm assuming he's just playing MP3s or AACs.

Beats are terrible trash. The point is to recreate sound as close as possible not alter it to hip-hop ears. If it makes badly recorded stuff sound better I guess I really could care less who uses them but I would never buy them.

For best playback set your sample rates as close as you can to the source you are listening to. You get zero benefit from playback at higher sample/bit-rates. Most of the time you actually impeded the sound doing this. Too much scanning or oddball playback mathematics.
For even better playback if you feel the sound lacking invest in a better sound card (you don't need to spend too much to get a noticeable boost). Then set the sample rates to the same as above.
Just don't be working with 128-192khz MP3's expecting the world. The sound is still missing.

 

[goMac]

Right, a 44.1 khz to a 48khz conversion seems to me like it could hurt 44.1khz tracks, not make them sound better. 24 bit wouldn't hurt, at least.

Now I'm curious to see this Macworld article. :-\