The human ear is supposed to be able to hear to about 20kHz, so I personaly don't cut at 16kHZ. I think you will find that your tracks will lose that sparkle and sizzle that you get from those higher frequencies, often making tracks seem a little duller.

I think 192K is supposed to be apprent CD quality, although the best results will come as a wave/aiff file.

As for vinyl, the quality depends on the cutting itself, not just the media it is stored on.

___________________
1 out of every 4 people in this country are mentally disturbed. Look at your 3 closest friends. If they seem okay, then you're the one.

What program did you use to do that Freq Analisys?

YOu cannot compare MP3 quality to that of vinyl or CD.
MP3 is a lossy compression algorithm... what that means is that it loses data that supposedly isn't heard by the human ear (anything outside 20Hz to 20kHz). Tracks are made with extra data in the below 20Hz and some above 20kHz to shine and pound on bigger systems.

Basically, if you're mastering or rendering or making music in general. Use WAV or AIFF for mastering and distribution/final-copy media such as vinyl or CD. there's no better way to have it. MP3 puts a harsh digital brightness to your music, and destroys all warmth.

If the music's for preview clips or internet broadcast... use MP3 or WMA, but for media that can handle more quality...give it the quality.

And as for those frequencies above 16kHz.... KEEP THEM!!!...just shelf cut them off a bit so they don't pierce, but they keep the average amount of quality sizzle and hiss that makes those hihats and hi-end percussion pretty and the synths nice and full.

___________________

'-.SgtFoo.-'
My SoundCloud

quote:

Originally posted by Pappa What program did you use to do that Freq Analisys?

Adobe Audition/Cool Edit Pro

___________________
Phunktronix Mixes

Frequency above 16kHz is called 'air' in mastering circles. It gives you the feeling of sparkle and presence of your sounds in space. If you cut it, you will lose this important aspect of your song. Mastering enginners rarely use high pass or low pass filters on the whole mix.

___________________
entranced

Superb advice from SgtFoo regarding production and MP3 encoding!

You really want your tracks to contain a rich dynamic in the frequencey range, this makes it sound much fuller and warmer.

___________________

Kewlness, you should take some care when analizyng tracks. For example:
1. Don't analyze the whole track. If you want to compare freqs between two tracks you should choose a similar passage: rythm+bass+chords, only bass, only rythm, only pads... etc
2. Only analyze tracks proceeding from the same source (CD, Vinyl, Mp3). Each format has its own rules: Vinyl has an unavoidable crosstalk between L&R channels, MP3 usually cuts off frequencies over 16 Khz, CD has a -0.2 dB headroom and is dithered, tapes limit the stereo range... and so on... Tracks should be digitalized at the same frequency (44.1, 48, 96...) and wordlength (16, 20, 24, 32...).
3. The analisys window (time region) should be as equal as possible (the resolution of the freq analisys depends on the number of samples).
4. Overall... frequency analisys won't give us the "secret" of the pro sound. It's only a math trick. The freq analisys supposes that the ear is a linear system. There is nothing so strange, personal, surprising and nonlinear than the human ear. There are things more important than single freqs, like timbre, dynamics, aural (stereo and even more than stereo) perception.

Sometimes it's better to turn off your uv-meters, spectrographs,... and just hear what you are making (of course IMHO).

thx for all your comments from all you audio buffs...

didn't know there were that much importance in those high frequencies... i have analyzed several other "professional" tracks, and I do notice that some of them actually do cut above 16,000 hz but I do notice a small amount of the lack of fullness

once again, thank you