[LAU] edirol fa101 on differant rate that 48k ?

Robin Gareus robin at gareus.org
Wed Nov 17 21:19:15 UTC 2010

On 11/17/10 21:43, Eric Steinberg wrote:
> I have never noticed any artifacts with downconverting of samplerate, except
> on lower-quality Windows conversion software and early versions of Steinberg
> Wavelab (no relation!).  Upconversion is another story....is there a quick
> and easy way to measure if conversion artifacts are present in an audio
> file?

"quick and easy" - I don't think so.

http://src.infinitewave.ca/ provides a nice analysis of SRC code.
Note that 'libsamplerate' is filed under 'secret rabbit code' there.


> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Paul Davis <paul at linuxaudiosystems.com>wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Eric Steinberg
>> <eric.steinberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Thomas, why do you use 88.2k as your samplerate?  Just curious; I use
>>> 44.1 if I'm going to CD, 48 if I'm doing pro video, and 96 or 192 if I
>> want
>>> really high fidelity- but I've never used 88.2.
>> its 2x 44.1 so that resampling to CD format is very artifact free, but
>> you get the benefits of a higher SR.

More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list