22 Dec
2012
22 Dec
'12
11:05 p.m.
On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 16:53 -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Ralf Mardorf
<ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 12:44 -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
That's correct. I was mistaken, but you was mistaken too ;). Please,
lets forget about this "battle".
IMO it's more important how we can use Linux with what interfaces ever,
to get the best quality regarding to the sound, at less costs.
I need 48 KHz with the best bit rate I can get. I don't like less than
48 KHz and I'm unable to hear that > 48 KHz does improve something,
excepted of my 2 TerraTec cards, for them 96 KHz does sound better,
might be a converter issue.
Regards,
Ralf
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Ralf Mardorf
<ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 09:19 -0800, Len Ovens wrote:
> On Sat, December 22, 2012 7:42 am, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 14:58
+0000, John Murphy
wrote:
> >> Synth manufacturers: Why no
ADAT out?
> >
> > Would be nice for homestudios today, assumed
there
would
be cheap cards
> > with several ADAT inputs. My RME card only has
got one
ADAT, that btw.
RME HDSPe AIO
> does not work with Linux.
and what card would that be? ADAT can do 48KHz, 96KHz and 192KHz.
Nobody will use
44.1KHz
for
pro-audio, so that wouldn't cause an issue.
the usual ralph misinformation. does it ever stop?
ADAT supports 44.1kHz and 48kHz as-is. With the S-Mux
"standard", it
can route 88.2kHz and 96kHz signals, but each
channel is
split across
two ADAT channels, causing a 50% reduction in the
number of
available
channels.
Can you give an example for misinformation by me?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-multimedia/2012-November/013570.…
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-multimedia/2012-November/013572.…
i have at least 3 ADAT equipped devices that support 44.1kHz via
ADAT.
claiming that ADAT cannot support 44.1kHz is just wrong.