<<Hi Scott
Thanks for the input. When you convert 48 to 44.1 quickly, you say it
is at lower quality.>>
Sample rate conversion in Digital Performer is faster than real time &
is really pretty good. I haven't had problems with it, however I feel
the SRC in BIAS Peak is somewhat more transparent. We're talking
extremely minute factors here, & I haven't done extensive comparisons,
but I feel the 3 X realtime Peak process is giving me a slightly
better result. I just don't have hours of free studio time to to
dedicate to sample rate conversion.
<<Will the resulting 44.1 file be lower quality than if you had
recorded directly at 44.1 in the first place?>>
I've never done that test. To me a sample rate conversion is like
putting an extra several audio adaptors (XLR to Tuchel to TRS, etc) on
a cable. You may never have a problem with it, but it is an additional
unnecessary step which MIGHT induce a problem, & will never produce a
positive benefit, in & of itself. A bitstream converted from 48k to
Message: 44.
Subject: 1k is not going to be bit for bit identical to the original.
Whether this is audible is open to debate, but why do it if you don't
have to, especially when there is really no advantage?
<<Also as yet I have not understood, is there any noticeable advantage
for us to use even 96kHz, over 44.1kHz? IN particular if we will
anyway be finally converting the files to 44.1kHz CD format?>>
This is an ongoing debate in the audio world. Generally the advantages
to high sample rates are really only barely audible at best, & even
then only with the highest quality (i.e. very expensive) A to D
converters. Middle of the road converters really don't have
sufficiently transparent analog stages to portray the additional
octave of bandwidth clearly. The classical labels & producers I work
with have been unimpressed enough with the supposed advantages of high
sampling rates that 44.1k has always been perfectly acceptable.
<<For example I read about aliasing distortions which apparently give
96kHz an advantage. I can't say I understand what that really means,
but am wondering, is that relevant or noticeable for our nature
recordings?
Justin>>
Aliasing is the interaction of frequencies in your audio with half the
sampling frequency, causing intermodulation artifacts. In early A to D
converter designs this was an audible issue, but any worthwhile
current design has pretty well figured out how to deal with the
filtering issues involved. Theoretically a higher sampling rate does
move this interaction another octave higher & out of human audibility,
but lower sampling rates use oversampling to achieve the same benefit,
so it's really a nonissue with any converter worth using.
Scott Fraser
|