Covenant

Uhm ok.. Det går alltså inte få ut 192 kvalitén som en mp3:a ? Jag måste dra ut den som en flac tex, och sen konvertera flac till mp3 ? Det gör väll kvalitén sämre om jag måste konvertera ett antal gånger ? 😮 Är nyfiken på hur folk spelar in / exporterar på 192 inställningar bara.. eftersom att det inte funkar för mig trots att ljudkortet stödjer det 😛

Vill testa och se för mig själv lite, men det går ju inte ens spara ut med dom inställningarna 😛

Finns ganska många som inte håller med om det (som inte tjänar nått på att sälja såna produkter) .. här har du ett exempel 2. THE ALIASING THANG. All converters have to issue a pulse for each clock cycle. That pulse, while very quiet, disturbs the waveform in ways that are not necessarily musical or desirable (noise). 192KHz allows that pulse to be moved way up above the audio spectrum to get *most* of the noise out of the way. 3. THE RESOLUTION THANG. Neil Young, at the height of his anti-digital days, used to rant about square waves. The fact is that, the all-important subjective experience aside for a moment, a waveform at 44.1 *does* look like a staircase compared to the same waveform at 192 (especially at lower signal levels, where resolution deteriorates even further), and 96 is in the middle (Loony Toons?), while DSD (2.8MHz sampling frequency) looks more than twice as smooth as 192. Comparing 44.1 to 192 is like comparing South Park animation to Pixar.... some people might subjectively prefer the choppy animation style of South Park over the silky smooth kinda-realism of Pixar animations, but people who are into "realism" are obviously gonna prefer Pixar. 192 has twice as many "frames" per second as 96, so the digital audio "cartoon" is going to be smoother and more realistic - there's more information there, so it better approximates the original waveform (assuming the waveform hasn't been mangled by processing somewhere along the line). 4. THE TRANSIENT RESPONSE THANG. Back in the real world, one place where 192 (or, better yet, DSD) really makes a difference is with transients (very, very brief sound events). The lower the sample rate, the more distorted the transients, because the *slower* sample rates don't react quickly enough to accurately represent very short-lived events. Since higher frequencies have shorter lives, this transient response is more noticeable at higher frequencies - try listening to a triangle or high-pitched bell recorded clearly at 44.1, 96, 192, and DSD, and see if you can't hear the difference. Are most of you gearslutz recording a lot of triangles these days? I dunno, but personally i like to capture all the shimmer of cymbals and the magical sparkling transients from my Matchless amp, too, through high-end mics and preamps that actually register all those transients, and higher sample rates clearly do a better job of preserving that glorious detail. But if you earn your living recording fart noises through an SM57 (nice work if you can get it), you might or might not notice much of a difference at 192 vs 44.1 or 96, knowamsayn? 5. THE "FEEL" THANG. Some engineers argue compellingly for finding alternatives to the LPF, so as to allow the rest of the spectrum up to 192 to be rendered clearly - not because humans can *hear* above 20something KHz, but because we can *feel* it. Whether one is consciously aware of feeling something different at 192 is an entirely different question, but, hey... waves is waves; there's something physically different going on at 192 - it may be subtle, but it's objectively real - and who's to say someone else doesn't notice or care? It is understandable, then, that both feel-oriented audiophiles and technical purists alike don't wanna mess with even those parts of the spectrum that can't be heard but certainly can be felt (at least by some of us, and i count myself among those). 6. THE... ER... SOUND... THANG. Well, folks, we like to say that, in the end, all that matters is what each of us hears and prefers... and some of us, myself included, do hear a difference at 192, and we prefer it. I also hear the difference between well-recorded DSD and 192, and i prefer DSD - it's indeed the closest digital has come to 2" 16-track. But that's me... YMMV, etc.

Inställningar på mitt ljudkort : Sample Rate =192.000 Hz. Buffer size (samples) = 8192 (är det högsta.. inte poängen dock) Har exakt samma inställningar i musik programmet, men när jag ska exportera / spara ut till en mp3:a så står det bara "mp3 pro (FhG) cannot handle the current sample type, would you like to convert to 48.000 Hz 16 bit and continue?" .... Min fråga : Hur går man till väga för att "spara ut" nått i 192 eller 96 Hz kvalité ? Det enda som funkar är 41.000 Hz.. Ska jag ha 192 på inställningar och spela in med det, mixa och mastra, och sen downsampla till nått annat innan jag sparar ut till en mp3:a ? Är rätt ny på just den här fronten så lite hjälp vore tacksamt ! 😄

Jag har en sån Avantone C-12 till salu för tillfället, hojjta om någon är intresserad så kan vi snacka vidare !