7 Dec
2018
7 Dec
'18
10:46 p.m.
hi all,
i'm looking for a soundcard that can capture at 192kHz, preferably 4
channels (at this samplerate), with phantom power.
the frequency response should be fairly flat up to 85kHz (i'm mainly
interested in the frequency range between 77kHz and 81kHz).
afaik the roland UA-55 (Quad-Capture) both supports the required sr and
its anti-aliasing lowpass doesn't kick out my payload..
the UA-55 seems to be discontinued, but i guess that the UA-1010
(octa-capture) would also have suitable hardware (and is able to capture
4 channels @ 192kHz).
however, from what i've found on various forums, both devices only have
basic support on linux; esp i've read that they are only supposed to run
in 44.1kHz, which - for my use-case - is a show-stopper.
the UA-1010 is about 500€ which is nice enough (i don't think the
project would be able to afford a 1000+€ soundcard).
gfmdfx
IOhannes
7 Dec
7 Dec
11:03 p.m.
IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoelnig(a)iem.at> writes:
hi all,
i'm looking for a soundcard that can capture at 192kHz, preferably 4
channels (at this samplerate), with phantom power.
the frequency response should be fairly flat up to 85kHz (i'm mainly
interested in the frequency range between 77kHz and 81kHz).
I rather doubt you'll be able to get a soundcard that guarantees
frequency responses above something like 32kHz. The main point of such
high sample frequencies is to get rid of audible aliasing effects and
allow for processing without significant frequency warp when doing
bilinear transforms. "Flat up to 85kHz" is silly for audio processing,
and 85kHz is just slightly below the Nyquist frequency of 96kHz,
requiring quite steep analog filters defeating the purpose of high
quality audio sampling.
Are there any "audio" cards with 384kHz sample frequency that is more
than a marketing gag but actually supported by the hardware? Because
you'll have quite a better chance to be in a reasonable quality range at
85kHz if you are not as close to the theoretical limit while being way
above what is actually audible.
--
David Kastrup
8 Dec
8 Dec
10:31 a.m.
On 12/7/18 10:03 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoelnig(a)iem.at> writes:
well, the RME babyface claims +-1dB in the range of 5Hz - 92kHz.
i know that the UA-55 is used by people who have no idea whatsoever
about audio (and are no audiophiles either), but still require the
record sounds in the 50kHz-85kHz range. so i figure that card would be
ok as well (if it did support 192kHz under linux)
hi all,
I rather doubt you'll be able to get a soundcard that guarantees
frequency responses above something like 32kHz. The main point of such
high sample frequencies is to get rid of audible aliasing effects and
allow for processing without significant frequency warp when doing
bilinear transforms.
sure. that's why i was asking on the list.
"Flat up to 85kHz" is silly for audio
processing,
why?
Are there any "audio" cards with 384kHz sample frequency that is more> than
a marketing gag but actually supported by the hardware? Because
i'm afraid not.
hence i am asking.
fgmrdsa
IOhannes
10:59 a.m.
Hi,
the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 2nd Gen (does cost 129,-€ in Germany), respl.
the complete Focusrite Scarlett series of the 2nd generation could do
192KHz. I'm using a Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 2nd gen, but IIRC I never
used anything else than 44,1 KHz and 48 KHz with the Scarlett.
A long time ago I tested 192 KHz with my RME HDSPe AIO. The noise floor
increased that much, that at least with this card, 192 KHz for my taste
are unusable for audio productions, while IIRC there's no noise floor
issue at 96 KHz with this card or even when using a Terratec EWX 24/96
at 96 KHz (96 KHz is the highest sample rate of this particular
Terratec).
Regards,
Ralf
--
pacman -Q linux{,-rt{-cornflower,,-securityink,-pussytoes}}|cut -d\ -f2
4.19.7.arch1-1
4.19.5_rt4-0
4.19.1_rt3-0
4.19_rt1-0
4.18.16_rt9-1
11:50 a.m.
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 09:59:50 +0100
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
A long time ago I tested 192 KHz with my RME HDSPe AIO.
The noise floor
increased that much, that at least with this card, 192 KHz for my taste
are unusable for audio productions,
Of course the noise floor increased- it's
double the bandwidth!
But all that extra 'noise' is going to be way outside the audible range.
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
12:10 p.m.
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 09:50:14 +0000, Will Godfrey wrote:
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 09:59:50 +0100
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
IIRC it was audible, but I might be mistaken. Your claim is, that the
additional noise is in a frequency range we don't hear, it doesn't
affect the audible frequency range? The meters just show the sum of all
frequencies? Maybe. Perhaps I'll test it again, but since I've got an
incurable tinnitus since this year, I anyway might be unable to notice
some kinds of nuances anymore.
--
Kitty, Daisy & Lewis - The Game Is On
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL6Cuo0YPlo
Kitty, Daisy & Lewis - Down On My Knees
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD86aRsJ1N0
Kitty, Daisy & Lewis - Black Van
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lL--_xzNLI
A long time ago I tested 192 KHz with my RME HDSPe
AIO. The noise
floor increased that much, that at least with this card, 192 KHz for
my taste are unusable for audio productions,
Of course the noise floor increased-
it's double the bandwidth!
But all that extra 'noise' is going to be way outside the audible
range.
11:13 p.m.
On 12/8/18 10:50 AM, Will Godfrey wrote:
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 09:59:50 +0100
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
ah well. i obviously need the 192kHz to do ultrasonic recordings.
i'm mostly interested in things outside the audible range.
relatedely, i don't care about "audio production" (as in: high fidelity
for human ears).
my audience (or rather: musicians) are non-human by nature.
gfamrds
IOhannes
A long time ago I tested 192 KHz with my RME
HDSPe AIO. The noise floor
increased that much, that at least with this card, 192 KHz for my taste
are unusable for audio productions,
Of course the noise floor increased- it's
double the bandwidth!
But all that extra 'noise' is going to be way outside the audible range. 
11:31 p.m.
New subject: ultrasonic performance -- was: 192kHz soundcard?
On 12/8/18 10:13 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
my audience (or rather: musicians) are non-human by
nature.
Aliens at IEM? I knew it! :)
Can you share some details of this art project or do we have to wait for
the vernissage?
It reminds me of "rats in NYC:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/09/21/magazine/voyages-travel-soun…
Never having measured or recorded it myself, I found it interesting that
the spectrum around ~80kHz is rather quiet, even in otherwise noisy
urban environments.
Cheers!
robin
9 Dec
9 Dec
12:21 a.m.
New subject: ultrasonic performance -- was: 192kHz soundcard?
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 22:31:41 +0100, Robin Gareus wrote:
Aliens at IEM?
It's said that in-ear monitoring for Vogons reading poetry is a good
thing, at least better than monitoring by speakers, so that every body
else needs to hear it, too. OTOH the Vogons poesy's beauty might get
lost in the human's audible spectrum.
12:29 a.m.
New subject: ultrasonic performance -- was: 192kHz soundcard?
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 23:21:09 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 22:31:41 +0100, Robin Gareus wrote:
A Babel fish might not be able to convey the beauty within human
hearing range.
Aliens at IEM?
It's said that in-ear monitoring for Vogons reading poetry is a good
thing, at least better than monitoring by speakers, so that every body
else needs to hear it, too. OTOH the Vogons poesy's beauty might get
lost in the human's audible spectrum.
1:12 a.m.
New subject: ultrasonic performance -- was: 192kHz soundcard?
On 12/8/18 10:31 PM, Robin Gareus wrote:
On 12/8/18 10:13 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
not an arts project. this is about monitoring a colony of greater
horseshoe bats in one of their last breeding roosts in austria.
mdsa
rIOhannes
my audience (or rather: musicians) are non-human
by nature.
Aliens at IEM? I knew it! :)
Can you share some details of this art project or do we have to wait for
the vernissage? 
11 Dec
11 Dec
12:18 p.m.
New subject: ultrasonic performance -- was: 192kHz soundcard?
On Sun, 2018-12-09 at 00:12 +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
On 12/8/18 10:31 PM, Robin Gareus wrote:
That sounds really cool. When you've got everything setup, please give
more details. :-)
Cheers
/Daniel
On 12/8/18 10:13 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
not an arts project. this is about monitoring a colony of greater
horseshoe bats in one of their last breeding roosts in austria. my audience (or rather: musicians) are non-human
by nature.
Aliens at IEM? I knew it! :)
Can you share some details of this art project or do we have to
wait for
the vernissage? 
8:52 p.m.
New subject: ultrasonic performance -- was: 192kHz soundcard?
Daniel Swärd <excds(a)kth.se> writes:
When the album comes out, people are gonna go batshit.
--
- Brent Busby + ===============================================
+ "The introduction of a new kind of music must
-- Studio -- + be shunned as imperiling the whole state, for
-- Amadeus/ -- + styles of music are never disturbed without
-- Keycorner -- + without affecting the most important political
-- Recording -- + institutions." --Plato, "Republic"
----------------+ ===============================================
On Sun, 2018-12-09 at 00:12 +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig
wrote:
> On 12/8/18 10:31 PM, Robin Gareus wrote:
not an arts
project. this is about monitoring a colony of greater
horseshoe bats in one of their last breeding roosts in austria.
That sounds really cool. When you've got everything setup, please give
more details. :-) 
7 Dec
7 Dec
11:11 p.m.
The Steinberg UR242 could fit the specs and is fairly cheap.
I had the smaller UR22 and it was working pretty good until it developed
nasty
clicks that i never found the source for (independent of the system i
used it with)
On 07.12.18 21:46, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
hi all,
i'm looking for a soundcard that can capture at 192kHz, preferably 4
channels (at this samplerate), with phantom power.
the frequency response should be fairly flat up to 85kHz (i'm mainly
interested in the frequency range between 77kHz and 81kHz).
afaik the roland UA-55 (Quad-Capture) both supports the required sr and
its anti-aliasing lowpass doesn't kick out my payload..
the UA-55 seems to be discontinued, but i guess that the UA-1010
(octa-capture) would also have suitable hardware (and is able to capture
4 channels @ 192kHz).
however, from what i've found on various forums, both devices only have
basic support on linux; esp i've read that they are only supposed to run
in 44.1kHz, which - for my use-case - is a show-stopper.
the UA-1010 is about 500€ which is nice enough (i don't think the
project would be able to afford a 1000+€ soundcard).
gfmdfx
IOhannes
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--
Niklas Reppel
www.parkellipsen.de
8 Dec
8 Dec
midnight
I was quite surprised to find the KA6 running at 96k managed a 40k bandwidth.
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
12:07 a.m.
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 09:46:49PM +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
i'm looking for a soundcard that can capture at
192kHz, preferably 4
channels (at this samplerate), with phantom power.
the frequency response should be fairly flat up to 85kHz (i'm mainly
interested in the frequency range between 77kHz and 81kHz).
That's only 4 kHz. Bandpass and mix with a 70 kHz sine and you get
7 to 11 kHz, any normal soundcard will handle that.
Ciao,
--
FA
10:21 a.m.
On 12/7/18 11:07 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 09:46:49PM +0100, IOhannes m
zmölnig wrote:
that bandwidth is what i'm *mainly* interested in.
we are monitoring real world signals, and it might well be that we need
to monitor lower frequency ranges as well.
gfamrds
IOhannes
i'm looking for a soundcard that can capture
at 192kHz, preferably 4
channels (at this samplerate), with phantom power.
the frequency response should be fairly flat up to 85kHz (i'm mainly
interested in the frequency range between 77kHz and 81kHz).
That's only 4 kHz. Bandpass and mix with a 70 kHz sine and you get
7 to 11 kHz, any normal soundcard will handle that.
9 Dec
9 Dec
12:35 a.m.
On 12/7/18 9:46 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
hi all,
i'm looking for a soundcard that can capture at 192kHz, preferably 4
channels (at this samplerate), with phantom power.
the frequency response should be fairly flat up to 85kHz (i'm mainly
interested in the frequency range between 77kHz and 81kHz).
I tried the RME RayDAT with an external converter (Ferrofish A16 Mk II)
- the RayDAT works fine on Linux at 192 kHz also at low latency (round
trip delay about 1ms), and with the A16 you can get 4 channels, however,
they don't have phantom power or mic amps built in. Total cost is about
1.500 €, but if you have converters lying around the RayDAT is "only"
600. I did not measure the frequency response, but if you are interested
I could do next week.
Best,
Giso
afaik the roland UA-55 (Quad-Capture) both supports the required sr and
its anti-aliasing lowpass doesn't kick out my payload..
the UA-55 seems to be discontinued, but i guess that the UA-1010
(octa-capture) would also have suitable hardware (and is able to capture
4 channels @ 192kHz).
however, from what i've found on various forums, both devices only have
basic support on linux; esp i've read that they are only supposed to run
in 44.1kHz, which - for my use-case - is a show-stopper.
the UA-1010 is about 500€ which is nice enough (i don't think the
project would be able to afford a 1000+€ soundcard).
gfmdfx
IOhannes
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
2175
days inactive
2179
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
17 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
Brent Busby -
Daniel Swärd -
David Kastrup -
Fons Adriaensen -
Giso Grimm -
IOhannes m zmölnig -
Niklas Reppel -
Ralf Mardorf -
Robin Gareus -
Will Godfrey