studiomprd Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 newendian: " I don't believe that humans can hear higher than 20khz " few humans, very few adults. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncg Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 "Unless there are technical issues with the 48k calculation that don't exist in 96k calculation, any technical issues that exist affect 48k and 96k equally in today's converters" This is the only thing I'm not so sure about. Unless I'm misunderstanding you? Some, Lavry and others seem to think that high rates have a trade of in accuracy. 96K could arguably be less accurate than 48K in practice. I'll see if I can dig up the relevant bits and pieces. Best Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEndian Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 Ah, yes. It's not so much a matter of accuracy, though. The issue with higher sample rates is that if they do contain frequency content higher than 20khz, equipment not meant to handle higher frequencies will cause audible distortion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncg Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 I see. I last looked into this about five years ago. I see from Audio Precisions site that they can now test up to 1Mhz at 24bit reliably so you would assume Jitter isn't the problem it was then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncg Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 Does make you think of the requirements of a full supersonic chain end to end huh. No CCM's, older MKH's etc (not a great number of mic's at all actually), no long runs of star quad, no analogue flat bed's (sonosax sx-st not included) before the recorder, not to mention the monitoring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constantin Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Very interesting about the TrueMatch: they forgo the use of preamps in favor of 4 extra bits of sampling depth. I may be looking at the wrong thing though. This seems to suggest a 96k sampling rate (and only <20khz frequency range)a bit off topic, but you are looking at the right thing. Apparently they recently updated the system and now made it 96k. I think this thread probably has run its course. I for one have enjoyed this discussion a lot (also due to the Ximph video) and after we have explored many issues regarding higher sampling rates, I will continue to record at 48k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEndian Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Xiph video: http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.