Am 04.06.2013 02:43, schrieb Len Ovens: > > On Mon, June 3, 2013 8:02 am, edmund wrote: > >> What are you calling "uncommon" sample rates? Ubuntu Studio is for >> multi media and in my case High res audio. Here we use 96 kHz and 192 >> kHz sample rates. Of course I have recorded in these samplerates also and in very few cases it really makes a difference. Most notably to me was, that Alsa Modular Synths sounds quite different at 96KHz.
>> VLC player, Is made to play the audio, that is relevant out there, where people listen to music that is mixed and mastered and that is: 48KHz Video, 44.1KHz Audio and that is it. > seems to play these formats too but it doesn't! >> When I play a 80 kHz sine it is audible audible, you say hmmm.... But maybe here we misunderstand: you mean, a, say: 1KHz sine with 80KHz samplerate right? OK, unless you (and everybody else, you want to share that recording with) have a DAC that supports that rate natively (like some of the better interfaces do), VLC will send the stream to the audio driver and there it will be resampled to whatever rate the DAC supports. So if VLC should do anything wrong here, than it would resample the signal itself, in some wrong way, that is. Did not know, that resampling a signal could be a culprit. Resampling from a rate, that nobody uses for distribution of sound recordings may be not that high a priority for a player, that is made to play distributed audio.... > as - something very different. >> It is far below 20 kHz and clearly audible on 10 Euro loudspeakers, >> so it is definitely not 80 kHz. >> I would say ditch it or use it for things that doesn't matter but not >> for playing high res or quality audio. Quality audio is 16/44.1 CDDA, carefully mastered and dithered from recordings, that may or may not be recorded at higher rates. I, BTW, have ditched the 96KHz experiments and use 48KHz with all great results and 9 out of 10 professional Studios do the same. >> Oh and yes it does so under windows too. > > Whatever rate you use, the input and the output of any of the audio > interfaces people have tested has been 20-20000Hz. I experienced, that it does make a difference, when a lowpass at 20KHz is applied but 48KHz deliver 24KHz and anything beyond that is indeed irrelevant. Distortion and noise have a real impact when HiFi is concerned, frequencies, that are beyond the double of human hearing do not. > This has been a > disappointment to those studying bats who have been unable to find any > computer audio interface that supported any higher frequencies. So I am > wondering where you would be getting an 80kHz sine wave from that is > output from a computer. A higher sample rate than 48000 does give a > smoother bandpass frequency response and allow a simpler HF roll off > filter to be used. However it also introduces the very real possibility of > high frequency foldover into the audible pass band. > > Yes many studios use "high res audio", but it is not because it is > measurably better. It is because the clients demand it because bluray > supports it. Many studios record at 48000 (the standard BTW) and upsample > to meet whatever format the client demands. The higher rates are IMO > gimmicks to sell new versions of old movies and of course the equipment > needed to support it. There are some audio cards that do sound better at > these higher rates, but they still do not include higher audio frequencies > than the low 20000 Hz range. It is merely a matter of the roll off filter > being designed for that rate and it not working quite so well at the lower > rate. A card designed for the lower rate can sound just as good. > > A good video to watch with real analogue measurement inputs and outputs is: > > http://www.xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml > -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
