Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: David Olofson <david@...>
Cc: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Monday, January 7, 2013 - 3:16 am

On Sun, January 6, 2013 3:17 pm, David Olofson wrote:

So as long as Jack is reporting the correct rate everything will be fine.

With a sampler there would be no advantage, true. To only be using a
sampler though would generally be live use of sampler and other
softsynths. Though there are reports that the hardware is better optimized
for 48K than 44.1k so the output sound _may_ be improved. On the other
hand, if there is any recording being done and the sampler is being used
only as one or two tracks with many live inputs, the live inputs do
benefit and the overall sound quality _should_ be higher. We wouldn't
record the whole project at 12bits and 32k just because we are using a
vintage synth that uses 12 bits at 32k to generate it's sound, but we
might still use that synth because we like it's sound. (no I don't know if
there is a real synth that uses that combination :)

--
Len Ovens
www.OvenWerks.net

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, Len Ovens, (Sun Jan 6, 11:54 am)
Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, Ralph Bluecoat, (Mon Jan 7, 1:56 am)
Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, Len Ovens, (Mon Jan 7, 4:37 am)
Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, Fons Adriaensen, (Mon Jan 7, 10:03 pm)
Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, Alf Haakon Lund, (Mon Jan 7, 5:01 pm)
Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, Len Ovens, (Mon Jan 7, 9:34 pm)
Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, David Olofson, (Sun Jan 6, 11:17 pm)
Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, Len Ovens, (Mon Jan 7, 3:16 am)
Re: [LAU] 48k vs. 44.1k, Neil, (Sun Jan 6, 8:18 pm)