Cockos Incorporated Forums - View Single Post - recording at high sampling rates eg..96k....people should read this.

Billoon · 04-17-2007, 06:37 PM

My understanding of what Mr Lavry is saying is...60-70kHz would be ideal...but soundcards dont run at 60-70kHz so the best option is 88.2 or 96kHz...

From here...

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-...ml#post1234224

There is a "speed accuracy tradeoff"...and "Nowdays there are a number of good designers and ear people that find 60-70KHz sample rate to be the optimal rate for the ear. It is fast enough to include what we can hear, yet slow enough to do it pretty accurately. "

RE: 44.1kHz...

"44.1KHz can be a somewhat tight squeeze, especially when we keep “piling” attenuation on that 20KHz range – most mics have 3dB loss at around 20KHz, then there is the AD with 3dB at 20K, then the speaker, the processor… Pretty soon the accumulated impact is such that there is not much 20KHz left… "

So he suggests..

"Moving the sampling a little higher (be it 60Kh, 88.2 or 96K) takes some of the “offenders” out of the picture (all you need is a few KHz extra and the problem is gone). "

Anyone think ive misinterpreted?

04-17-2007, 06:37 PM	#6
Billoon Human being with feelings Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arse end of the earth. Posts: 2,988	My understanding of what Mr Lavry is saying is...60-70kHz would be ideal...but soundcards dont run at 60-70kHz so the best option is 88.2 or 96kHz... From here... http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-...ml#post1234224 There is a "speed accuracy tradeoff"...and "Nowdays there are a number of good designers and ear people that find 60-70KHz sample rate to be the optimal rate for the ear. It is fast enough to include what we can hear, yet slow enough to do it pretty accurately. " RE: 44.1kHz... "44.1KHz can be a somewhat tight squeeze, especially when we keep “piling” attenuation on that 20KHz range – most mics have 3dB loss at around 20KHz, then there is the AD with 3dB at 20K, then the speaker, the processor… Pretty soon the accumulated impact is such that there is not much 20KHz left… " So he suggests.. "Moving the sampling a little higher (be it 60Kh, 88.2 or 96K) takes some of the “offenders” out of the picture (all you need is a few KHz extra and the problem is gone). " Anyone think ive misinterpreted?