On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Giesing wrote: > OT reply: > > IMO 48 KHz > > should be enough for home recording, below there's audible loss, but if > > the analog IOs and AD/DA converters are ok, 48 KHz even for professional > > studios should be high enough for nearly every kind of production. > > IMHO, if you can't go higher than 48KHz, then I'd actually stick with 44.1KHz > throughout the entire production flow, assuming that's going to be your final > sample rate. > Downsampling from 48K to 44K actually causes some artifacts in the higher > registers. They occur in all downsampling algorithms, but they actually sound > worse because the sample rates are so close together. Whatever audio quality > you get from 48K vs. 44K is negligible, in my opinion, and won't offset the > degradation from downsampling. > Of course, if you can go much higher (like 96K or 128K), then it's certainly > worth it. > That's just my opinion, of course. > -Karl.
Btw. some cards generate a better sound quality at some sample rates, regarding to their microchips, not regarding to Nyquist issues etc.. Hm? When using 32-bit float will there be 'loss' too? I (nearly) always kept 96 KHz and 48 KHz recordings at those sample rates. But of cause, burning an audio CD is interesting for me too, I just had many issues with Linux audio, regarding to the sound quality. For professional Studios as far as I remember we had a combination of Neve + Sony digital recorders, that if I remember correctly, were at 48 KHz and perhaps 16-bit 'non-float', but to be honest, I never heard a CD. CDs and MP3s always do sound disgusting. When I did jobs I usually had good luck and could use analog equipment. -- Ralf -- Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
