You are here: Home » Forum
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Connecting a Midas M32 to a Behringer X32

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Padrick View Post
    the difference between 96k and 48k is clearly audible.
    You should get in a test then. You'd be the first person who actually could hear a difference. There have been multiple double blind studies with professional audio engineers none of which were able to tell a difference in 48khz vs 96khz. When they were told first when ones were which many did hear a difference. Mostly I think the reason people hear a difference is because, they expect to hear a difference.

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard YClark View Post
    Also I to O latency should be lower with a 96kHz sample rate rather than 48kHz and may also help with effects processing. But in general as mentioned above shouldn't make any noticeable difference to the perceived audio quality.

    True but, unless you get plugin crazy with something like Waves. It's nothing to worry about. Even the Avid SC-48 which can do 20 plug-in effects at a time compared to the X32 8 is still only 48khz.

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Padrick View Post
    And between AES/EBU, S/PDiff, ATT optical, and TosLink optical.
    This was funny

    Makes me think of this:
    http://youtu.be/JdvJOF-2mm0
    x32, x32-rack, s16, p16, iNuke 6000dsp, deq2496, dxc2496, src2496, misc other behringer gear, StudioLive 24, StudioOne Pro, Cubase 4, Ableton Live 8 Suite, Reaper 4

  4. #34

  5. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Lofgren View Post
    This was funny

    Makes me think of this:
    http://youtu.be/JdvJOF-2mm0
    Exactly, results are based on what people expect to happen in many cases.

  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Finnigan View Post
    You should get in a test then. You'd be the first person who actually could hear a difference. There have been multiple double blind studies with professional audio engineers none of which were able to tell a difference in 48khz vs 96khz. When they were told first when ones were which many did hear a difference. Mostly I think the reason people hear a difference is because, they expect to hear a difference.
    I'd love to hear a comparison. However you left out the context in which I said it was audible. It may not be in all scenarios, but the possibility is there.

  7. #37
    Basically, IMHO, if a difference is audible then something must be very wrong in the design of the system!

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard YClark View Post
    Basically, IMHO, if a difference is audible then something must be very wrong in the design of the system!
    Yep. I've heard that some very cheaply made/entry level recording interfaces are like that. They sound better at 96khz than 48khz. But it's not actually because 96khz it an audible difference, it's because the 48khz algorithms on the device were poorly engineered. It has nothing to do with the 48khz vs 96khz really.

  9. #39
    dCS don't write bad algorithms

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •