es geht halt dabei um Dr. Nyquists Theorie:
http://www.lavryengineering.com/documents/Sampling_Theory.pdf
(
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist-Shannon-Abtasttheorem)
und dan lavry erklärt dann wieso diese 192khz sinnlos sind:
"Nyquist pointed out that the sampling rate needs only to exceed twice the signal bandwidth.
What is the audio bandwidth? Research shows that musical instruments may produce energy
above 20 KHz, but there is little sound energy at above 40KHz. Most microphones do not pick
up sound at much over 20KHz. Human hearing rarely exceeds 20KHz, and certainly does not
reach 40KHz. The above suggests that 88.2 or 96KHz would be overkill. In fact all the
objections regarding audio sampling at 44.1KHz, (including the arguments relating to pre
ringing of an FIR filter) are long gone by increasing sampling to about 60KHz.
Sampling at 192KHz produces larger files requiring more storage space and slowing down the
transmission. Sampling at 192KHz produces a huge burden on the computational processing
speed requirements. There is also a tradeoff between speed and accuracy. Conversion at
100MHz yield around 8 bits, conversion at 1MHz may yield near 16 bits and as we approach
50-60Hz we get near 24 bits. Speed related inaccuracies are due to real circuit considerations,
such as charging capacitors, amplifier settling and more. Slowing down improves accuracy."
"So if going as fast as say 88.2 or 96KHz is already faster than the optimal rate, how can we
explain the need for 192KHz sampling? Some tried to present it as a benefit due to narrower
impulse response: implying either "better ability to locate a sonic impulse in space" or "a more
analog like behavior". Such claims show a complete lack of understanding of signal theory
fundamentals. We talk about bandwidth when addressing frequency content. We talk about
impulse response when dealing with the time domain. Yet they are one of the same. An
argument in favor of microsecond impulse is an argument for a Mega Hertz audio system.
There is no need for such a system. The most exceptional human ear is far from being able to
respond to frequencies above 40K. That is the reason musical instruments, microphones and speakers are design to accommodate realistic audio bandwidth, not Mega Hertz
bandwidth."
"Audio sample rate is the rate of the audio data. Such data may be generated by an AD
converter, received and played by a DA converter, or even altered by a Sample Rate
converter.
Much confusion regarding sample rates stems from the fact that some localized processes
happen at much faster rates than the data rate. For example, most front ends of modern AD
(the modulator section) work at rates between 64 and 512 faster than a basic 44.1 or 48KHz
system. This is 16 to 128 times faster than 192KHz. Such speedy operation yields only a few
bits. Following such high speed low bits intermediary outcome is a process called decimation,
slowing down the speed for more bits. There is a tradeoff between speed and accuracy. The
localized converter circuit (few bits at MHz speeds) is followed by a decimation circuit, yielding
the required bits at the final sample rate.
Both the overall system data rate and the increased processing rate at specific locations (an
intermediary step towards the final rate) are often referred to as “sample rate”. The reader is
encouraged to make a distinction between the audio sample rate (which is the rate of audio
data) and other sample rates (such as the sample rate of an AD converter input stage or an
over sampling DA’s output stage)."
ihm gehts hier eigentlich um das 192khz SR was er für nicht so sinnvoll hält, ums mal knapp zusammenzufassen.
und darum gings dann mir:
"Conclusion:
There is an inescapable tradeoff between faster sampling on one hand and a loss of accuracy,
increased data size and much additional processing requirement on the other hand.
AD converter designers can not generate 20 bits at MHz speeds, yet they often utilize a circuit
yielding a few bits at MHz speeds as a step towards making many bits at lower speeds. The compromise between speed and accuracy is a permanent engineering and scientific
reality.
Sampling audio signals at 192KHz is about 3 times faster than the optimal rate.
It compromises the accuracy which ends up as audio distortions.
While there is no up side to operation at excessive speeds, there are further disadvantages:
1. The increased speed causes larger amount of data (impacting data storage and data
transmission speed requirements).
2. Operating at 192KHz causes a very significant increase in the required processing
power, resulting in very costly gear and/or further compromise in audio quality.
The optimal sample rate should be largely based on the required signal bandwidth. Audio
industry salesman have been promoting faster than optimal rates. The promotion of such ideas
is based on the fallacy that faster rates yield more accuracy and/or more detail. Weather
motivated by profit or ignorance, the promoters, leading the industry in the wrong direction, are
stating the opposite of what is true."
und ob sich da mittlerweile was an den DA Wandlern getan hat? bin kein Physiker - und auch nicht vom fach, will nur das bestmögliche für meine Ansprüche rausholen

- und das ist mir alles viel zu theoretisch...
was benutzt ihr den für Settings? alle 16 bit und 44khz wegen cd? cd's brauche ich gar - falls ich releasen würde dann auf vinyl (oder ein mp3 - web snippet). was wäre denn dafür geeignet?
[Geändert von <a href="https://recording.de/myRecording/Profil/t-racks">t-racks</a> am 12.10.2010 15:57 Uhr]