Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] is (88200->44100) better than (96000->44100)?
From: Erik de Castro Lopo (erikd-lad_AT_mega-nerd.com)
Date: Thu Feb 19 2004 - 12:17:08 EET
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:17:38 +0300
Andrew Gaydenko <a_AT_etver.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The question is in subject. The situation is: I'm going to capture some of my
> old LP disks and (after some processing) write some mixes to CD. I'm able to
> record with any format from 24/96 and lower. Which recording samples rate and
> size are the best in accordance with next converting to CD format?
The big question is what program are you using for doing the sample
rate conversion. If it is any program which uses libsamplerate there
is no difference in quality between going 96000->44100 and going
88200->44100, although the latter will be slightly faster in terms
of processing speed.
Whatever rate you choose, i would suggest capturing at 24 bit. You
can then use something like Gnome Wave Cleaner to clean up the
recordings. The next step is to normalize and then finally converting
to 16bit 44100.
The final step of converting from 24/XXXXX to 16/44100 should also
include dithering which libsndfile does not do (yet, plans on the
board).
HTH,
Erik
-- +-----------------------------------------------------------+ Erik de Castro Lopo nospam_AT_mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid) +-----------------------------------------------------------+ Complex problems have simple easy to understand wrong answers.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Feb 19 2004 - 12:16:26 EET