Can you hear the difference between 44.1 and 48k?

[KG10]

In theory it should be none at all since human hearing typically has an upper limit of 20k.

But then I've seen claims online that it can actually pick up frequencys up to 50k.

 

[SeeMoreDigital]

Was the digital source (not analogue) encoded at a higher sample-rate of say 96 or 192kHz prior to being reduced to 44.1 and 48kHz?

 

[KG10]

Was the digital source (not analogue) encoded at a higher sample-rate of say 96 or 192kHz prior to being reduced to 44.1 and 48kHz?

Good question, although for this I'm mainly talking about generally.

 

[Marplot]

I would also suggest most of my 44.1 come from loudly mastered CDs while the 48 come from DVD/BR that are not treated in such a ham fisted way. As a result, yes they sound different but it is due to mastering and not 4kHz

 

[SeeMoreDigital]

Good question, although for this I'm mainly talking about generally.

Unfortunately it's not a good idea to use generalities when asking such questions...

When conducting such audio tests it's good practice to start with a 'known source' that's been encoded at the highest possible sample-rate and bit-depth (preferably one that's been captured, mixed and mastered digitally).

Then you create your 44.1kHz and 48.0kHz 'comparison encodes' from the known source for testing.

 

[KG10]

Unfortunately it's not a good idea to use generalities when asking such questions...

When conducting such audio tests it's good practice to start with a 'known source' that's been encoded at the highest possible sample-rate and bit-depth (preferably one that's been captured, mixed and mastered digitally).

Then you create your 44.1kHz and 48.0kHz 'comparison encodes' from the known source for testing.

Those are good points there.

 

[par4ken]

We are kind of splitting hairs with this poll. You are more likely to hear a difference between 44.1K and 96K or 192K. Theoretically 44.1K should be more than enough to pass everything that we can actually hear. In practice those old first generation CD players sounded horrible. The advent of oversampling improved the sound quality greatly. Any noticeable difference is likely to be equipement and program dependant.

I'm all for improving sound quality in ways that are measurable i.e. wider frequency response, lower distortion. Only if those improvements make things sound worse is there a problem, in that case we must be measuring the wrong parameter.

So I'm voting "Yes but only a little" to cover all the bases. I admit that "little" difference could translate into no noticeable difference much/most of the time.

 

[marpow]

When HDTracks sells a 16bit/44.1Khz vs a 24bit/44.1Khz, yes I can hear the difference, the 24bit being the better.
But that was not Post 1 question.
So based on the question I voted No.