Gearslutz.com - View Single Post - Audible difference 44.1kS/s vs 96kS/s? (files included)
View Single Post
Old 9th January 2010   #26
neilwilkes
Lives for gear
 
neilwilkes's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: London, England
Posts: 930

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
I record at high sample rates myself because my converter seem to perform better at higher rates. To this day I'm not 100% sure why that is the case and I'm performing tests when I have extra time to sort this and general related questions out.

If a converter sounds better at higher rates, can you keep that quality with an optimum software SRC in post as opposed to record directly at 44.1kS/s or is it about HF content and filter limitations.


/Peter
It's cheaper to design & build a converter to sound good at 88.2/96 than it is to make it sound equally as good at 48/44.1.
Bob Katz explains it much better than I can in the 2nd edition of his excellent book
Bob Katz - Mastering Audio
Symptoms can include any or all of these:
higher distortion, ripple, ringing (*) and aliasing.
* = this one is very common in poorly designed Linear Phase SRC too

As far as actual HF content goes, can you honestly hear above 22kHz?
__________________

Mixing,Mastering & Post Production
Surround Specialists (all formats)
Blu-Ray (Pure Audio Blu Ray & HDMV authoring)
DVD-Audio/DVD-Video Authoring (Music, Film & TV)
neilwilkes is offline   Reply With Quote