[LAU] Sample rate vs. SNR

Len Ovens len at ovenwerks.net
Wed Jan 23 22:10:08 UTC 2013

On Wed, January 23, 2013 12:20 pm, Joe Hartley wrote:

> I don't have the original thread any more, but I'm pretty sure it was Fons
> as well who explained why this mattered.
> It has a lot to do with the native rate of the device and the math
> involved
> at having to achieve the non-native rate.  Some ADCs (like the Delta 1010)
> allow you to set their native rate, so running my 1010s at 44.1k was no
> problem.

>From the conversation, I got the message that even with a "native rate" of
44.1k, it would be likely that it would not be as good as 48k. Just that a
good 48k setup is much easier/cheaper than 44.1k unless the 44.1k is band
limited to 18khz audio pass band or so. I have a Delta 66 (like a 1010
with fewer channels) and from what I have read about the quality of parts
used and some other design decisions, I would stick with 48k.

I have been reading what I can on audio interfaces... I am thinking there
are very few good ones. I am thinking that some parts of the system are
vastly over priced like ADAT and MADI interfaces, both of which seem to
cost about 10X (at least) what they should cost... like how come a Gb NIC
is well under $100 and MADI PCI(e) card (100Mb) is $800? Even figuring in
scale that is way too much. ADAT (even slower... only 8 channels in one
direction at a time) which uses the same parts as s/pdif is $500 (and
up)... though I guess one could call that the price of keeping obsolete
interfaces around.... right in there with vintage gear :)

I would suggest that any PCI(e) card that has ADC/DACs on the card is less
than a great quality card, even dealing with sample clock (or power) on
the card seems less than optimal. For audio quality, it seems FW, USB and
ethernet _could_ give better results if designed right.

Len Ovens

More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list