Tim Brown said:
why go for the "extreme" if you are not going to use it's full potential.
An analogy that I find often helps explain this situation is that the sample rate is very much like a TV monitor. 44.1k would be a Sony Trinitron CRT tube displaying in standard NTSC (or PAL, for our EuroFriends
) resolution. 96k would be like a nice wide-screen HD monitor.
Now, if we're watching, say, Star Wars III on DVD, it will look great on the Trinitron, but will look even more spectacular on the HD widescreen. In this case, the Star Wars DVD would be the analog of a top-notch pro tracking job through the best mics, pres and converters.
On the other end of the spectrum, let's say we're watching an original episode of The Honeymooners with Jackie Gleason et al, broadcast in standard analog from a tower on a building 50 miles away and we're receiving that signal through a pair of rabbit ears. The wide screen HD TV now looses any advantage it once had over the old school Trinitron. The picture will still be in poorly contrasted black and white, will still have a 4:3 aspect ratio, and will still be filled with static. It won't look any better on the bigger TV other than the fact that you'll be able to pick out even more fault with the content because the static and distortion will be in even finer resolution, even if the signal itself isn't. It'll still look like crap on both, but on the HD the crap will be more apparent.
So unless and until one is prepared to receive digital HD content, that big screen HD monitor - which probably cost about ten times as much as the "obsolete" Trinitron - is both money and technology wasted. In the case of high-resolution recording, it's also a waste of computer resources.
As far as the RME being better than the Presonus, yes it probably is, but not *because* it has a 192k option, but because it's better at 44.1. Is it worth $800 just for that part of it? It can be. I have my eye lustfully upon a UA2192 converter that's only 2 channels and that costs $1800 more than the 8-channel Firepod. Definitely far more expensive, even more so than the RME. But IMHO, if one has the budget, it's more than definitely worth the cost. I'm just saving up my pennies. And I'd still only be using it at 44.1k most of the time even though it too can go to 192k.
The quality of converter is far more important than teh speed at which it can convert. A great converter at 44.1k will beat out a dime a dozen converter at 192k every time.
G.