96kHz or 192kHz interface?

All about the tools and techniques involved in capturing sound, in the studio or on location.

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply

Re: 96kHz or 192kHz interface?

Post by narcoman »

ken long wrote:
Off duty BBQ lighter AKA Idris wrote:
everyone focuses on upper limit frequency response when talking about higher sample rates....

without considering what it might mean to transient impulse response...


The only transient information one can "hear" is those within our limits anyway. We can feel shock waves below are hearing limit - and I'm sure above. But speakers can't properly reproduce a shock wave - too fast and too loud.

And Dans right - there isn't a such thing as a square wave. Also we only experience impulse responses bound by our own hearing bandwidths. The values we use in digital sampling go along with those natural characteristics.

Dots and samples ?Look up sinc functions and reconstruction filters.
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3287 Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am
Battenburg to the power of 20 - said by Richie Royale in a moment of genius. 4pm. Wed 16th Nov 2011. Remember where you were....

Re: 96kHz or 192kHz interface?

Post by A Non O Miss »

an expert on this stuff i am not, however, my take on it all is this...

if you are doing classical 96k

if you are doing video 48k

everything else 44.1k

any other cogitating upon it is a little OTT and frankly seems to be nothing more then brain/knowledge flexing... not that having an intrinsic and thorough understanding of it all won't subconsciously help in the end product, but, that alone won't do anything to the end product as far as making it better without the creative content part first being there...
A Non O Miss
Posts: 296 Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:00 am

Re: 96kHz or 192kHz interface?

Post by Folderol »

As Dan said it's all confusingly counter-intuitive, even to those of us that think we've got a bit of a grasp of it!

Another factor that muddies things further, is that when people say they can hear the difference between 48k & 96k sampling rate, what they are most likely hearing is the performance of crap analogue filters. At the higher sample rate you can have a much more gentle slope which means fewer phase and stability compromises.
User avatar
Jedi Poster
Posts: 17910 Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:00 am Location: The Mudway Towns, UK
Yes. I am that Linux nut {apparently now an 'elderly'}
Onwards and... err... sideways!
Post Reply