All Advertisers
| All Advertisers |
| |||||||
| Notices |
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
2nd December 2007, 07:00 PM
| #1 |
| Gear nut Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 146
| 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, 07:40 PM
| #2 |
| Gear nut  Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 144
| 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 
__________________  http://aaronhendra.com http://giverecords.com
|
|
| |
|
2nd December 2007, 08:38 PM
| #3 |
| Gear addict  Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: PA
Posts: 463
| 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, 10:28 PM
| #4 |
| Gear maniac Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Surf Avenue, NY
Posts: 232
| 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. |
| |
|
3rd December 2007, 02:42 AM
| #5 | |
| Gear nut Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 146
| Quote:
:) | |
|
| |
|
3rd December 2007, 02:48 AM
| #6 | |
| Lives for gear  Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Dallas, TX / New Orleans, LA
Posts: 4,166
  | Quote:
| |
|
| |
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
| |
Linear Mode
