SRC 96-44.1 or 88.2-44.1 what`s best?

[Tongi]

I`ve heard that it is easier for a converter to make the calculations from 88.2K down to 44.1 than from 96 to 44.1. But what does this mean in real terms? Are applications such as Wavelab good enough at SRC to make recordings at 96k worthwhile, assuming that most of us are aiming for 44.1 anyway. Or is it just a question of how long it takes to make the convertion?

I made some tests myself and felt that 88.2-44.1 was somehow more convincing, but I´m not certain. I know that there are dedicated hardware SRCs and some other interfaces also handle it but I don´t have a 1000 or what ever just to spend on a SRC!

If there is a problem here, then this is something to think about for anyone like me who has looked at buying one of the new cards from E-mu which don´t support 88.2 or 176.4.

Any feedback on this subject would be appreciated.

 

[manning1]

this is my personal opinion, so please dont get upset.
i come at this issue from a forest rather than one tree perspective.
being a computer engineer i also wrote a program to look at files
with different rates. and frankly from what i saw - i saw a lot of wasted disc space. often it comes down to the individual multitracks application
in mixing. as most multitrack applications can operate internally at 32 bit imho 24 bit 44.1 is the max someone needs to go.
there have been a million arguments pro and con on this.
including many scientists. for readings on all the posts i suggest you go to google groups rec.audio.pro and read the various postings from some pretty distinguished people from top audio engineers to scientists,
and the various discussions about nyquest etc etc.
i think youll come away from it all with the same conclusion as i did.
hope this helps. peace.