Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

24bit/96KhZ confusion


Recommended Posts

Hi there, I have a question for you guys. Given: a system consisting of a yamaha O2Rv2 (@ 24bit/48khz) digital mixer and a hard disk recorder eg Tascam MX2424 or Mackie HDR 24/96 (@ 24bit/96khz) connected through their optical ADAT interfaces. As you may notice the Yamaha O2Rv2 mixer can transfer data at 24bit with a sampling frequency of 48khz. So, if you have a Hard disk recorder which records data at 24 bit / 96khz, what would happen to the sound since the mixer sends data at 24bit/48khz? Does this causes a degredation to the sound or is it possible to go from 48 khz to 96 khz without ruining the sound? Thanks alot Cheers! Horus
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 11
  • Created
  • Last Reply
[quote]Originally posted by eyegod: [QB So, if you have a Hard disk recorder which records data at 24 bit / 96khz, what would happen to the sound since the mixer sends data at 24bit/48khz?[/QB][/quote]The Yamaha mixer would most likely report a digital clocking error, as it doesn't support the 96kHz sample rate. I doubt that the Yamaha would pass any audio if it were to be fed a 96kHz signal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for replying In other words, you have to match the whole system to 24bit/48 khz. am i right? Now if you mix down everything to a computer with a sound card that can take signals at 96khz, you would experience the same problem? So at present you cannot match a system which consists of an affordable digital mixer with a hard disk recorder at 24bit/96khz. Agree? Is it worth waiting for the time a full blown system will come out consisting of an affordable digital mixer @96khz and a hard disk recorder @ 96khz? Is there a real difference in the sound between 24bit/48khz and 24bit/96khz? thanks Horus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<> Yes, there is a difference. The question is whether the difference is significant. My opinion is that the musical performance is 90% of the listener's experience. Sound quality represents the other 10%. If sound quality was truly that important, MP3s would be a footnote in recording history.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys. I will not do that Rog :) So with an analog mixer there will never be this problem if you have a recorder which records at 24bit/96 khz? Why? Another thing: What do you thing about the new AKAI DPS24 24 track portable recorder? Thanks people Horus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I will not do that Rog :) " Do it, do it! ;) "So with an analog mixer there will never be this problem if you have a recorder which records at 24bit/96 khz? Why?" Because analogue has nothing to do with sample rate and bit depth. Good analogue desks hold their value because they sound good. Digital always goes down in value because, seemingly every other week, there is a new product which claims to do things better, faster or has more flashing lights and adheres to the latest standard (ask any PT user who gets shafted every couple of years) Get a good desk, then convertors and a DAW. You can afford to junk the PC every year or two and upgrade convertors if they really start to make progress in this field, and I'm not just talking about the latest 385735 kHz 634 bit ones, I'm talking about sound quality. (or look at a RADAR system - the convertors are apparently very very good)
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." - Banky Edwards.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...