Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <len@...>
Cc: A list for linux audio users <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Thursday, February 7, 2013 - 4:14 pm

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Len Ovens wrote:

Yep - thanks Len - that was certainly my experience with SBLive and
onboard sound.

With the Focusrite Scarlett 2i4, it actually seems to run with
(slightly) less CPU load at 44.1k than 48k (much less than 96k), and I
think it might make 44.1k a better choice to avoid the extra
downsampling etc. for the final mix in that instance. Not sure if it
actually runs natively at 48k or whatever tho - not sure how I would
find that out.

James
_______________________________________________
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] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, James Stone, (Thu Feb 7, 10:17 am)
Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, James Stone, (Thu Feb 7, 10:33 am)
Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, Len Ovens, (Thu Feb 7, 4:48 pm)
Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, James Stone, (Thu Feb 7, 4:14 pm)
Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, Len Ovens, (Thu Feb 7, 5:08 pm)
Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, Brent Busby, (Fri Feb 8, 1:06 am)
Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, James Stone, (Fri Feb 8, 7:10 am)
Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, Brent Busby, (Fri Feb 8, 7:15 pm)
Re: [LAU] Tracking at 44.1 vs. 48k vs 96k?, Len Ovens, (Fri Feb 8, 2:05 pm)