[Don Pearce]

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ...
Mike Rivers wrote:
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

.... 88.2 makes for good math....
Only in arithmetic. It's really no easier to convert 88.2 kHz to 44.1
kHz as to convert 96 kHz, or 50 kHz or 163.4 kHz. You still have to
recalculate every sample. You can't get good results by simply taking
every other sample as some people infer.
You can, IF you do a lowpass at 22 KHz first. This is called "filtering
and decimating" and is sort of the crudest possible sample rate conversion.

Most actual realworld software, though, uses the same algorithm whether or
not you are dividing by an integral factor.

Like I said.... "makes for good math".... I didn't mention audio. ;-)

I still record all of my sessions at 24/44.1, and I'm on Digi 192s / Apogee.

Dither sucks. (Again, JMHO).


How do you record without dither?

d

[Mike Rivers]

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

I still record all of my sessions at 24/44.1, and I'm on Digi 192s / Apogee.
Dither sucks. (Again, JMHO).

Dither is what gets applied when changing the word length, not the
sample rate. There's almost certainly dithering going on inside your DAW
program, and to get from your final 24-bit mix to a 16-bit CD. At lease
it will sound better if dithering is applied in the process of reducing
the word length.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[David Morgan \(MAMS\)]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

I still record all of my sessions at 24/44.1, and I'm on Digi 192s / Apogee.

Dither sucks. (Again, JMHO).

Dither is what gets applied when changing the word length, not the
sample rate. There's almost certainly dithering going on inside your DAW
program, and to get from your final 24-bit mix to a 16-bit CD. At lease
it will sound better if dithering is applied in the process of reducing
the word length.

Sorry... I suppose I am leaving my comments open to misunderstanding.

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
I still record all of my sessions at 24/44.1, and I'm on Digi 192s / Apogee.

Dither sucks. (Again, JMHO).

Dither is what gets applied when changing the word length, not the
sample rate. There's almost certainly dithering going on inside your DAW
program, and to get from your final 24-bit mix to a 16-bit CD. At lease
it will sound better if dithering is applied in the process of reducing
the word length.

Sorry... I suppose I am leaving my comments open to misunderstanding.






I just assumed that you meant sample rate conversion :-)