On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 17:07:22 +0100 Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Regarding the sample rate consider to use 48 kHz usually there's no > advantage to use a higher sampling rate and most of the times a lower > sample rate does cause audible loss. > > "The Audio Engineering Society recommends 48 kHz sampling rate for > most applications" > > "Most professional audio gear uses 48 kHz sampling, including mixing > consoles, and digital recording devices." > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28signal_processing%29 That can be a much valid point. Everything boils down to what can be distributed easily anyways. Is there a significant difference when sampling at 192,000 (jack max on this machine) and then having a final mastering for CD purposes ? Well, there will be more points to work with, this is certain. Does it make a difference ? Will more complexities of the guitar playing end up being actually felt, tidbits that audiophiles can argue about for hours ? Will it bring a somewhat sense of a richer sound to the listener ? Not sure that it is entirely mathematics. The notion of psychoacoustics was used in developing the MP3 format as inherently there's more than math to music. Will this have an influence on the projects I make - most probably not, although it is an interesting topic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoacoustics _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
