Delta/66 : Not really 96kHz?

J

jelly

New member
Well, according to someone has post that he tested something with his Delta/44 card and found out that it isn't really 96kHz sampling rate. What is it about? And what is the fact about this thing if anyone know? Because Delta44 and 66 is the same except SP/DIF right? I really want to know the truth about this. If it isn't really 96kHz sampling rate how can M Audio says it is?
 
They can't say it's 96 khz if it isn't and would be setting themselves up for major bad press and law suits if it wasn't. There are certain buzz words That advertisers can bend the rules on khz isn't one of them. Midiman / M-audio has been around for a while and is known for being a manufacturer of quality products. This phantom post you mentioned is more likely the source of misinformation. I'm not saying there's no way that it might be a true, but I doubt it given the company and their past performance of products.
 
I second what TEA says. I saw that post jelly referred to and looked at his screen grab. Sure looked like a file where every sample had been cloned from a 48kHz file to get a 96kHz file. But this is such an obvious and simple test to perform... if M Audio were misrepresenting their products, they'd have been found out more-or-less immediately by reviewers and certainly their competitors would be all over them...

I did send a pointer to that post to M Audio's tech support and asked them to comment... if they reply I'll let you know what they said.

AlChuck
 
So did it cross anyone's mind about that "double 48 sample" deal that maybe there were no samples that were a high enough frequency to cause it not to show two samples at the same volume in a row? A hi hat hit is at it's highest around 12-14KHz. It would get sampled over three times per second (the frequecy center that is) and of course the hit itself last's for a bit of time. So it would stand to figure that when analyzing a hi hat track, you would see many samples in a row that were the same volume because the length of the frequency is not long enough to do anything else. Throw in the fact that maybe the guy had some crummy gear that was squashing the frequency response potential, and what ever audio was there would "appear" to be double sampled.

It would be hard to find many audio sources that are up around 48KHz, the highest frequency that a 96KHz A/D converter could record. Maybe with a trumpet you would have stuff up that high (mostly hard to see and hear overtones) or a triangle.

You guys get what I am saying here?

Ed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top