"karle" wrote in message
Thanks,
I want to know if average people can really hear the
difference between, 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, an 192 khz.
The advice I need is, should I:
1-Start with a 192khz source, downsample it and play it
back at the downsampled rates on the D to A converter
A waste of time.
2-Start with a 192khz source, downsample it and play it
back at the highest rate on the D to A converter
http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=14195
Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior
sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or
at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard. The authors
report on a series of double-blind tests comparing the analog output of
high-resolution players playing high-resolution recordings with the same
signal passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz “bottleneck.” The tests were
conducted for over a year using different systems and a variety of subjects.
The systems included expensive professional monitors and one high-end system
with electrostatic loudspeakers and expensive components and cables. The
subjects included professional recording engineers, students in a university
recording program, and dedicated audiophiles. The test results show that the
CD-quality A/D/A loop was undetectable at normal-to-loud listening levels,
by any of the subjects, on any of the playback systems. The noise of the
CD-quality loop was audible only at very elevated levels.
Discussed here.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=57406
3-Record the same performance at different sample rates
and then play it back at its native sample rate
If ny native sample rate you mean 44.1 or 48 kHz, this is the thinking
man's solution.