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

[ejsongs]

to lee and everyone else who has posted this thread:

My reasons for asking about the audible diffence in sample rates are as follows:

1. To me all digi did was give us the same system we already have but at 96K. They did not change the summing mixer so that means to me that the HD system running at 48K with their new interface is not going sound any better that the existing system with a good clock and great converters.

2. Per the digi reps at namm running the HD system @ 96K requires so much power that you end up with only 64 tracks and same amount of dsp power card for card as the Mix system @48K.

3. One rep said that they changed the dithering mixer but I have no idea what that means or how that will translate.

4. I do r&b & pop so I could care less about 24track @ 192 K.

So the question is, do I upgrade & spend $10,000 and go through the headaches of bug fixes over the ability to record frequencies and overtones that only mice can hear or continue to make records on something that I know gets good results and works. I've got apogee converters and unless this new system blows the mix system away. I see no point to upgrade [unless the 96K or 88.2K (which makes more sense because it is a 2:1 ratio when going down to 44.1) becomes the industry standard].

special note to Lee: I often enjoy reading your post but for the record I've been accused of having exceptional ears by many engineers. The notion of buying the HD system or recording @ 96K just so the 5 people in the world who can hear the difference between 96K and 48K will be happy seems a bit ridiculous to me. If there is a significant difference or it becomes the industry standard then I'll have no choice but to switch. If not, then digi can kiss my !@#$#@