Videodrome;216862 Wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't part of the attraction to 96K > upsampling to reduce the brick wall effect of filtering at or near 44.1 > kHz? And thus by doing so, better / smoother filtering occurs? With > less aliasing, quantization noise, etc.? > > Now, unlike the most of you, I'm NOT a computer guy. Nor did I stay in > a Holiday Inn Express last night, so I may be missing the boat here. > > I can tell you, however, I recently added a SRC Behringer 2496 to the > digital stream before my DAC and, at 24/96 upsampling, I like what I > hear. > > Also, what's the mathematical magic to upsampling to 88kHz vs. 96kHz. > Are bits really that OCD?
realtime44.1 to 96 is computationaly more tricky and requires decisions whereas 44.1 to 88.2 is simply doubling... All of it rather pointless IMHO when the DAC will do it internally anyway (usually to 384, 768 or even higher) YMMV -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... ...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some very expensive cables ;o) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36986 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
