Re: [LAU] Pro Audio? OT rant.

On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 20:53 -0500, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Ralf Mardorf
> <ralf.mardorf@email-addr-hidden-dsl.net> wrote:
> > ADAT can do 48KHz, 96KHz and 192KHz. Nobody will use
> 44.1KHz
> > for
> > pro-audio, so that wouldn't cause an issue.
> >
> > the usual ralph misinformation. does it ever stop?
> >
> > ADAT supports 44.1kHz and 48kHz as-is. With the S-Mux
> "standard", it
> > can route 88.2kHz and 96kHz signals, but each channel is
> split across
> > two ADAT channels, causing a 50% reduction in the number of
> available
> > channels.
>
>
> Can you give an example for misinformation by me?
>
>
> Along with Paul pointing out that ADAT CAN do 44.1, saying that 44.1
> recording will never be used for Pro-Audio is also misinformation. If
> you are going to CD only, it removes the need to do a sample rate
> conversion, which obviously means less noise, and while there may
> certainly be some differences in audio quality, some people believe
> the difference from said conversion is greater than the difference in
> audio quality form 44.1 vs 96, etc.

Now you spread misinformation ;). Is there any scientific source for
that claim?

My impression is (might be scientifically right or wrong, it's my
experience) that

- < 48 KHz sound can be ok for some sources, but it
  also can become very bad
- > 48 KHz you don't hear an improvement, IOW 48 KHz is
  all that's needed
- There is some gear that does sound better at > 48 KHz,
  but if you compare that gear with other gear at 48 KHz
  it doesn't sound better

I don't have experiences with conversion from 48 KHz to 44.1 KHz, when I
did it (doing something a few times doesn't lead to experience), the
sound becomes less good, that's the nature of 44.1 KHz. I don't know any
scientific reason that a conversion should cause issues, but producing
at 44.1 KHz does cause issues, since the sound is less good, mixing is
harder to do.

I was asked how the sound quality is, when I use 192 KHz with the RME
card, but I can't answer this question, because I don't record at 192
Khz.

I guess the bit depth is important, especially for production, perhaps
less important for listening to the finished recoding.

YMMV!

Regards,
Ralf

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Sun Dec 23 16:15:01 2012