48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

Has anyone heard recordings done at these sampling rates? Is there a noticable difference? I'd love to know what you guys think before I consider doing the upgrade.

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

It has more "air" and "depth". The degree of imnprovement depends on what you record.

You may also want to ask about conversion to 44.1. Some suggest that it will sound worse whan 44.1 direct due to rounding errors in the conversion.

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

I've heard 96k and 192k sampling rates on numerous ocassions. I've got to tell you that I don't really hear that much of a difference. I don't get what the big deal is with these higher sampling rates. If you have to strain to hear a "percieved" difference - then what's the point?

tbird undefined [img]images/icons/cool.gif[/img]

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

There must be a difference between Wav files and MP3, because there is a huge difference between an MP3 file at 48,96, and 192K.
Not sure how that translates though.
Allen [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Park Seward:
It has more "air" and "depth". The degree of imnprovement depends on what you record.

You may also want to ask about conversion to 44.1. Some suggest that it will sound worse whan 44.1 direct due to rounding errors in the conversion.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That converters are you using?

Nika

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

there is a big differnice its your converters use a the trusty 888 or a apogee the head room is big at 96. stereo is more wide .the higher the sample rate the closer you get to the real audio thats going in to protools..

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

Oh god.

This one's gonna' go round in circles.

If you have good converters then the difference is absolutely undetectable.

Nika.

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

I could find NO demo comparison at the NAMM show between low and high sampling rates. If the difference was apparent, companies would have been showing it off.

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

The diff will be on woodwinds and reeds, as their overtone scale goes waaaaaay high. Anything wind like will benefit. Hopefully some genious at Sony will just up and make 192k the standard so we can quit fussing around like this...

[img]images/icons/cool.gif[/img]

Re: 48k vs 96k or 192k..can we hear the difference?
 

JamerJ,

How on Earth are we supposed to record those"waaaaaay high" harmonics? Do you know of one (or several) mics that have a matching frequency response? I'd be interested. I think I'll hang on to my precious Euros until I find out.

Didier