Delta freqs out?

[B1&B2]

I was just reading the specs for my new Delta66 and noticed that the analog inputs freq response is 22Hz-22kHz. I assume that recording at 96kHz is therefore useless unless I'm using the digital inputs?

Also - can anyone suggest the best software to convert 24bit wavs to 16bit (for CD)? Thanks

[This message has been edited by B1&B2 (edited 07-26-2000).]

 

[AlChuck]

The audio frequency response is not the same as the sampling rate. The rule of thumb is that the theoretical frequency response of the recorded audio is a around half the sampling rate -- hence CD audio, with a sampling rate of 44.1kHz, gets you about 20kHz freq. response. I'm not sure why the 96kHz sampling rate of the Delta only translates to 22 kHz, but it's sort of a moot point, unless you have some really superb mics and are recording certain instruments, you'll never pick up any energy in frequencies that high anyway.

 

[Spray]

Why 96kHz? I tried it once and could not hear a reasonable difference.(If any at all)
And it is not only you wont find a mic to record something above 22kHz but you wont be able to hear it. The human ear is designed for a max frequency of about 20kHz. And that is for kids. A normal adult will be able to sense a frequency between 16-18kHz on the max. Also most hifi-stations wont reproduce any frequencies above 10kHz. So why should we crowd our harddiscs with samples no one will ever be able to hear?

 

[Track Rat]

There's the region between 20 and 30 kHz that you don't actually hear but there is content there that a lot of folks like Rupert Neve feel is very important still in audio.

 

[AlChuck]

Not to mention that the better the resolution, the better will be the results of any digital signal processing applied to the data -- less truncating and rounding errors, that sort of thing. Of course once you boil it down you lose some detail, but still if you work with very high res to start you'll be better off when you dither down.