Help wanted: 2 channel 24bit AES/EBU sample rate conversion 96khz to 48khz

[Marcel de Velde]

Hi,
I need a 2 channel 24bit sample rate converter from 96khz to 48khz.
Have to do it with hardware to hook up a Quantec Yardtick reverb
running at 48khz with a Lynx AES16-SRC audio card running at 96khz.
I've looked all over but simply can't find a box that isn't too
expensive and just does this and not a million other things +
channels.
If anybody here knows of such a box please let me know at
mdevelde_laptop AT hotmail.com and I'll be eternally greatfull! :)

[Scott Dorsey]

Marcel de Velde > wrote:
>I need a 2 channel 24bit sample rate converter from 96khz to 48khz.
>Have to do it with hardware to hook up a Quantec Yardtick reverb
>running at 48khz with a Lynx AES16-SRC audio card running at 96khz.
>I've looked all over but simply can't find a box that isn't too
>expensive and just does this and not a million other things +
>channels.

Why? Why do you have to run the card at 96 ksamp/sec anyway?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Marcel de Velde]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message >...
> Marcel de Velde > wrote:
> >I need a 2 channel 24bit sample rate converter from 96khz to 48khz.
> >Have to do it with hardware to hook up a Quantec Yardtick reverb
> >running at 48khz with a Lynx AES16-SRC audio card running at 96khz.
> >I've looked all over but simply can't find a box that isn't too
> >expensive and just does this and not a million other things +
> >channels.
>
> Why? Why do you have to run the card at 96 ksamp/sec anyway?
> --scott

Because I want to run my Mytek converters at 96khz because of better
audio quality, because of improved audio quality in plugins when using
96khz audio and improved audio quality when converting back to 44.1khz
in samplitude in the end.
The Lynx card provides very good sample rate conversion on it's inputs
but none on the outputs.

[Scott Dorsey]

Marcel de Velde > wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message >...
>> Marcel de Velde > wrote:
>> >I need a 2 channel 24bit sample rate converter from 96khz to 48khz.
>> >Have to do it with hardware to hook up a Quantec Yardtick reverb
>> >running at 48khz with a Lynx AES16-SRC audio card running at 96khz.
>> >I've looked all over but simply can't find a box that isn't too
>> >expensive and just does this and not a million other things +
>> >channels.
>>
>> Why? Why do you have to run the card at 96 ksamp/sec anyway?
>
>Because I want to run my Mytek converters at 96khz because of better
>audio quality, because of improved audio quality in plugins when using
>96khz audio and improved audio quality when converting back to 44.1khz
>in samplitude in the end.

If you're going to be running everything down to 48 ksamp/sec and lowpassing
it anyway, all of the ultrasonic information you gain at 96 ksamp/sec is
totally lost. Whatever you gain is going to be more swamped by what you
are losing in the SRC process.

But, why can't you just run the Lynx at one rate when it's plugged into
the Mytek, then running it at a different rate going into the Quantec?
There's no reason not to do the SRC in software if you're going to be
stuck doing it anyway.

>The Lynx card provides very good sample rate conversion on it's inputs
>but none on the outputs.

So, do it in software. I still don't understand where your problem is.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Marcel de Velde]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message >...
> Marcel de Velde > wrote:
> (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message >...
> >> Marcel de Velde > wrote:
> >> >I need a 2 channel 24bit sample rate converter from 96khz to 48khz.
> >> >Have to do it with hardware to hook up a Quantec Yardtick reverb
> >> >running at 48khz with a Lynx AES16-SRC audio card running at 96khz.
> >> >I've looked all over but simply can't find a box that isn't too
> >> >expensive and just does this and not a million other things +
> >> >channels.
> >>
> >> Why? Why do you have to run the card at 96 ksamp/sec anyway?
> >
> >Because I want to run my Mytek converters at 96khz because of better
> >audio quality, because of improved audio quality in plugins when using
> >96khz audio and improved audio quality when converting back to 44.1khz
> >in samplitude in the end.
>
> If you're going to be running everything down to 48 ksamp/sec and lowpassing
> it anyway, all of the ultrasonic information you gain at 96 ksamp/sec is
> totally lost. Whatever you gain is going to be more swamped by what you
> are losing in the SRC process.
>
> But, why can't you just run the Lynx at one rate when it's plugged into
> the Mytek, then running it at a different rate going into the Quantec?
> There's no reason not to do the SRC in software if you're going to be
> stuck doing it anyway.
>
> >The Lynx card provides very good sample rate conversion on it's inputs
> >but none on the outputs.
>
> So, do it in software. I still don't understand where your problem is.
> --scott

Hi Scott,
Thanks for your help, but I want to use the Quantec in realtime with
both the Mytek inputs and 96k audio when mixing.
I have finally found a good solution though.
Z-systems make a dedicated sample rate converter Z-link96 which can be
modified for AES/EBU, so my problem is solved :)

btw I beleive there's more to 96k vs 48k than just ultrasonic
information.
At 48k A/D converters and many plugins produce errors or artifact in
the audible frequency range and working in 96k reduces this. I really
hate digital artifacts but love the possibilities and convienience of
computers. I'm just hoping that by using high sample rates, high
quality digital equipment and carefull use of all of this I can keep
the computer part as transparent as possible.

[Arny Krueger]

"Marcel de Velde" > wrote in message
om
> (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message
> >...
>> Marcel de Velde > wrote:
>>> (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message
>>> >...
>>>> Marcel de Velde > wrote:
>>>>> I need a 2 channel 24bit sample rate converter from 96khz to
>>>>> 48khz. Have to do it with hardware to hook up a Quantec Yardtick
>>>>> reverb running at 48khz with a Lynx AES16-SRC audio card running
>>>>> at 96khz. I've looked all over but simply can't find a box that
>>>>> isn't too expensive and just does this and not a million other
>>>>> things + channels.
>>>>
>>>> Why? Why do you have to run the card at 96 ksamp/sec anyway?
>>>
>>> Because I want to run my Mytek converters at 96khz because of better
>>> audio quality, because of improved audio quality in plugins when
>>> using 96khz audio and improved audio quality when converting back
>>> to 44.1khz in samplitude in the end.
>>
>> If you're going to be running everything down to 48 ksamp/sec and
>> lowpassing it anyway, all of the ultrasonic information you gain at
>> 96 ksamp/sec is totally lost. Whatever you gain is going to be more
>> swamped by what you are losing in the SRC process.
>>
>> But, why can't you just run the Lynx at one rate when it's plugged
>> into the Mytek, then running it at a different rate going into the
>> Quantec? There's no reason not to do the SRC in software if you're
>> going to be stuck doing it anyway.
>>
>>> The Lynx card provides very good sample rate conversion on it's
>>> inputs but none on the outputs.
>>
>> So, do it in software. I still don't understand where your problem
>> is.
>> --scott
>
> Hi Scott,
> Thanks for your help, but I want to use the Quantec in realtime with
> both the Mytek inputs and 96k audio when mixing.
> I have finally found a good solution though.
> Z-systems make a dedicated sample rate converter Z-link96 which can be
> modified for AES/EBU, so my problem is solved :)
>
> btw I beleive there's more to 96k vs 48k than just ultrasonic
> information.
> At 48k A/D converters and many plugins produce errors or artifact in
> the audible frequency range and working in 96k reduces this. I really
> hate digital artifacts but love the possibilities and convienience of
> computers. I'm just hoping that by using high sample rates, high
> quality digital equipment and carefull use of all of this I can keep
> the computer part as transparent as possible.

So what happens when you listen to these musical samples with the provided
free DBT testing software?

http://www.pcabs.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm

[Marcel de Velde]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message >...

> So what happens when you listen to these musical samples with the provided
> free DBT testing software?
>
> http://www.pcabs.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm


Hi Arny,
I can't access the link you've sent, server is down I think.
I don't know what DBT testing is, but I assume you want to show the
degrading effects of sample rate conversion?
I'm aware of this however this effect is very very small I hope. Have
not heard it for myself yet as the equipment (Mytek, Lynx and Z-link)
I've just ordered and isn't in my studio yet (giving my studio a
complete overhaul :)
The Z-link specs show -120db for THD + noise together (going into the
Quantec), and the Lynx AES16-SRC (wet Quantec going back into my
computer) sample rate conversion specs say 142db dynamic range (!). I
know specs aren't allways everything but with sample rate conversion
what else could matter? Also this sample rate conversion is now only
for the reverb not for a whole mix and I don't think I'll find it
audible at all, but I'll let you know once my equipment has arrived if
you want.

I know most people reading this probably think I'm too worried about
very small differences etc but I think it DOES matter, a lot.
I make music for my own enjoyment and art, not for money I know that's
whole different story.
And deep detail and perfection (and perfection in the right
imperfection) can make music so much more involving and touching.

btw since were talking here about quality and accidently about digital
reverb, there's something I wanted to get off my chest for a long time
now:
LEXICON 960L SUCKS!!!!!! BIGTIME!!!
Sorry about that but I really had to let that one out in the open, I
was foolish enough once to buy it...
Maybe I've even done a good deed and prevented someone else from
buying that totally overpriced piece of sh*t ;-)

ok my rant is over.. time to go to sleep it's 9 in the morning here
lol

[Marcel de Velde]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message >...

> So what happens when you listen to these musical samples with the provided
> free DBT testing software?
>
> http://www.pcabs.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm

Oooh wait a minute I understand what you mean, a double blind test
haha
I'll probably won't pick out a difference between your musical files
at 48k and 96k just as I can't tell any difference between anything
sample rate converted 96k to 48k at highest quality in samplitude for
instance. But there's a huuuge difference between that and running a
whole project in 48k vs 96k!
I can easely tell the difference between many things done in 48k vs
96k, and if you can't, go to the docter to have your ears checked ;-)

[Arny Krueger]

"Marcel de Velde" > wrote in message
om
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >...
>
>> So what happens when you listen to these musical samples with the
>> provided free DBT testing software?
>>
>> http://www.pcabs.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm
>
>
> Hi Arny,
> I can't access the link you've sent, server is down I think.

No, I can't type.

http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm


Sorry, I should have tested the link.


> I don't know what DBT testing is, but I assume you want to show the
> degrading effects of sample rate conversion?

You might say that. You might want to start with the site's home page -
http://www.pcabx.com

> I'm aware of this however this effect is very very small I hope. Have
> not heard it for myself yet as the equipment (Mytek, Lynx and Z-link)
> I've just ordered and isn't in my studio yet (giving my studio a
> complete overhaul :)

You might want to do some listening tests before you are emotionally
committed to the new investments...

[Arny Krueger]

"Marcel de Velde" > wrote in message
om
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >...
>
>> So what happens when you listen to these musical samples with the
>> provided free DBT testing software?
>>
>> http://www.pcabs.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm
>
> Oooh wait a minute I understand what you mean, a double blind test
> haha
> I'll probably won't pick out a difference between your musical files
> at 48k and 96k just as I can't tell any difference between anything
> sample rate converted 96k to 48k at highest quality in samplitude for
> instance. But there's a huuuge difference between that and running a
> whole project in 48k vs 96k!

Please try the listening tests, even the one that go down to 32 KHz
sampling.

> I can easely tell the difference between many things done in 48k vs
> 96k, and if you can't, go to the docter to have your ears checked ;-)

Please try to be nice. You won't like me when I'm not nice.

;-)