Quote:
Originally Posted by wado1942  I'd personally rather have the 96K mix. Apogee's rather overrated IMO. Though those converters are probably slightly better, I think the benefits of 96K outweigh slightly better converters running at 48K. |
I'll take the opposite argument. I actually think Apogee converters often get a little bit under rated on this forum. They're certainly not the best out there but they can do the job nicely. I have an 8 channel Apogee/Soundscape 896I/O (discontinued model from around 2002) that while not my usual go to definitely still sounds nice and fine to this day.
I also think the differences created by having to go through different analog front ends are usually much more marked than the differences inherent in two different sample rates.
Of course the absolute best thing is just for the original poster to run two versions and do a comparison to see what to their ear is first closer in sound to the original source, and second what might be subjectively preferable in terms of end result for the specific track.
Quote:
|
Plus, 96K downsamples to 44.1 better than 48K. I know somebody will disagree but all my tests using multiple SRCs support my opinion.
|
I'll say that many other ears will definitely vary from this view - especially in light of non-subjective tests on src's that don't show marked differences between the two conversions for most algorithms. But again - folks just need to check for themselves what happens with the tools of their choice.
Best regards,
Steve Berson