[Park Seward]

Originally Posted by O.G. Killa

Just want to go back and point out this is urban legend. It is simply not true. they are both equally as easy and error free.

What effects the sound of the conversion is not the actual conversion to the new sample rate, it is the reconstruction filter at the Nyquist frequency. But this holds true for any sampling, not just sample rate conversion. The crappier the filter is, the worse it will sound.

"The's also why resampling at integer multiples or divisors would be less likely to distort, the math is simpler and less prone to round-off error. If we're downsampling from 96 to 48 all we need do is throw away every other sample. If we're upsampling, each new sample lies exactly halfway between the old and all we have to do is set its value to the average of the two old samples on either side of it. But if that new sample has to be inserted at .345654 of the time between two old samples and the next one is at .897667 of the time difference, and only a few of the new samples fall exactly on the same time mark as the old ones, now we got the problem in interpolation."

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-thin...important.html

Sampling rate conversion is simplified if rates are integer multiples of each other.

Here are some interesting charts comparing SRC with different manufacturers:

http://src.infinitewave.ca/