Rosetta 800 96k vs. Rosetta 800 192k.

justinmichael · 2nd December 2007

Rosetta 800 96k vs. Rosetta 800 192k.

Is there any sonic difference besides the higher sample rate?

ocianic · 2nd December 2007

FWIW.. I think most people feel on this board feel the topic of converters has been beaten to death. There's days of threads if you do a search.

You will hear different opinions.. My conclusion is that they are the same up to 96K.

Best thing is to read the info in the above search link and judge for yourself.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/searc...archid=75366688

Personally, I still enjoy the discussion.

Good luck

Glenn Bucci · 2nd December 2007

Dan Lavry concluded that some additional distortion is actually added back in at 192. (This is what Bob Katz stated in his Mastering book on the chapter regarding sample rates.)

nadumr · 2nd December 2007

I think he's asking if these particular products have different results at the same sampling rate (96k for instance) in order to inform himself of if it's worth investing in the newer product even if he won't use it at 192.

justinmichael · 3rd December 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by nadumr

I think he's asking if these particular products have different results at the same sampling rate (96k for instance) in order to inform himself of if it's worth investing in the newer product even if he won't use it at 192.

exactly!

nukmusic · 3rd December 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by justinmichael

Rosetta 800 96k vs. Rosetta 800 192k.

Is there any sonic difference besides the higher sample rate?

not that I noticed. you can also check with Apogee.

2nd December 2007	#1
justinmichael Gear maniac Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 158 Thread Starter	Rosetta 800 96k vs. Rosetta 800 192k. Rosetta 800 96k vs. Rosetta 800 192k. Is there any sonic difference besides the higher sample rate?

2nd December 2007	#2
ocianic Gear maniac Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 209	FWIW.. I think most people feel on this board feel the topic of converters has been beaten to death. There's days of threads if you do a search. You will hear different opinions.. My conclusion is that they are the same up to 96K. Best thing is to read the info in the above search link and judge for yourself. http://www.gearslutz.com/board/searc...archid=75366688 Personally, I still enjoy the discussion. Good luck __________________ theahp.com @Facebook @twitter @last.fm

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

2nd December 2007	#3
Glenn Bucci Lives for gear Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: PA Posts: 919 9 Reviews written	Dan Lavry concluded that some additional distortion is actually added back in at 192. (This is what Bob Katz stated in his Mastering book on the chapter regarding sample rates.)

2nd December 2007	#4
nadumr Gear maniac Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Surf Avenue, NY Posts: 275	I think he's asking if these particular products have different results at the same sampling rate (96k for instance) in order to inform himself of if it's worth investing in the newer product even if he won't use it at 192.