16bit/96khz Microphone+?

[Imagi_Nation]

So I have been looking for a 16bit/96khz Microphone+ for a couple months now and all I could find was a Razer one that (probably) has thouse settings for 150 around. Is there any other desktop microphones that exist that can get that quality? (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00QXT5M3C/?tag=pcpapi-20) - Razer Microphone, don't know if it does have 96khz sample rate if I remember correctly it probably does.

[Daniel Z.]

Bitrate doesn't matter much above a certain point. AT2020 and Blue Yeti are really good.

[Imagi_Nation]

2 minutes ago, Daniel Z. said:

Bitrate doesn't matter much above a certain point. AT2020 and Blue Yeti are really good.

Blue Yeti (not pro) has the same sample rates of my current microphone so I am kind of scared of that and the AT2020 might be 100 dollars but you need to spend another 100 to get it to be able to work.

[Daniel Z.]

Just now, Imagi_Nation said:

Blue Yeti (not pro) has the same sample rates of my current microphone so I am kind of scared of that and the AT2020 might be 100 dollars but you need to spend another 100 to get it to be able to work.

it doesn't matter. https://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technica-ATR2500-USB-Cardioid-Condenser-Microphone/dp/B004QJREXM/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1507251403&sr=8-8&keywords=audio+technica+microphone

[Daniel Z.]

https://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technica-AT2020-Cardioid-Condenser-Microphone/dp/B01MSYF0BH/ref=sr_1_6?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1507251426&sr=1-6&keywords=at2020

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DY1F2CS?ref_=ams_ad_dp_asin_img

https://www.amazon.com/Behringer-UMC202HD-BEHRINGER-U-PHORIA/dp/B00QHURUBE/ref=sr_1_5?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1507251471&sr=1-5&keywords=audio+interface

is way better

[Imagi_Nation]

2 minutes ago, Daniel Z. said:

https://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technica-AT2020-Cardioid-Condenser-Microphone/dp/B01MSYF0BH/ref=sr_1_6?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1507251426&sr=1-6&keywords=at2020

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DY1F2CS?ref_=ams_ad_dp_asin_img

https://www.amazon.com/Behringer-UMC202HD-BEHRINGER-U-PHORIA/dp/B00QHURUBE/ref=sr_1_5?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1507251471&sr=1-5&keywords=audio+interface

is way better

Thx

[loculus]

Wait, you're not trying to capture ultrasonics, are you? The audio quality in the audible spectrum is more or less unrelated to the max sampling rate that is supported on the digital-to-analog conversion.

[Imagi_Nation]

3 hours ago, loculus said:

Wait, you're not trying to capture ultrasonics, are you? The audio quality in the audible spectrum is more or less unrelated to the max sampling rate that is supported on the digital-to-analog conversion.

Look all I know is the lower the sampling rate the less clear sound sounds. (As experienced from my time in discord servers) (Also I am assuming it transfers over to youtube where I might start recording if I become unlazy)

[loculus]

On 10/6/2017 at 4:48 PM, Imagi_Nation said:

Look all I know is the lower the sampling rate the less clear sound sounds. (As experienced from my time in discord servers) (Also I am assuming it transfers over to youtube where I might start recording if I become unlazy)

Well okay, I should clarify that lowering to 32 kHz or lower sample rates actually matter and cut off the audible spectrum because the Nyquist frequency is below what people can hear. CD audio is 44.1 kHz for a reason, and every recording device supports at minimum 48 kHz, which is sufficient for most purposes.

 

If you're hearing some difference when recording at 96 kHz vs. 48 kHz, it's probably not actually legit but just in your head ("placebo") and differences might go away if you were to test more rigorously, blinded, etc. Or sometimes I guess the hardware is less-than-ideal and may underperform at once settings but not another, which could create actual differences, not just perceived ones. That's less likely to be the case and would be highly implementation specific, and that doesn't mean some device with a max of 48 kHz is necessarily less good for your purposes.

[mariushm]

Human voice is around 4 kHz to maybe 8-9 kHz. You need double that to preserve everything, so even with 22.050 kHz you'd be perfectly fine when it comes to human voices. 

 

See https://bloggeek.me/single-voice-codec-webrtc/ where it explains how frequencies are separated into old phone quality (narrowband), humans speaking quality (wideband), humans + acceptable music (super-wideband), and highest quality, full music (fullband)

 

You should stick to 44.1 kHz or 48kHz as that's what's best supported by codecs like AAC or MP3 or Opus which is what's mostly likely to be used by the game or software to upload your voice to others or to a central server.

If you record at higher sample rate, most likely the software will just resample down anyway.

 

[loculus]

That's a good point about which band speech ends up in. I think certain sounds like plosives, maybe s, etc. might be on the higher side, though not past 10 kHz in any significant degree.

[vanished]

Tbh I'd be more interested in 24 bit 48 kHz than 16 bit 96 kHz.  Normal "CD Quality" sample rates are honestly fine (as has been pointed out).  Where you might actually notice an improvement, especially if you have to boost gain is with a higher bit depth.