Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?  (Read 2155 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline stantheman1976

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1093
Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« on: June 06, 2007, 06:48:38 PM »
Let's see if I can word this to make any sense.

CD is 44.1KHz/16 bit.
DVD is 48HKz/16 bit.
The latest big thing is 24 bit/96KHz.

I am waiting on a Tascam 122L A/D converter that does 24/96.  If I take the feed from a SB does it actually have a sample rate or bitrate before it gets sent through the Tascam?  What about analog cassette or vinyl?  Is it beneficial to use a converter like this to transfer a tape or record to PC at 24/96?  Also, does the iRiver act as a A/D converter when I'm recording line in or is that something different altogether?  Sorry if I'm ignorant on this situation.  I haven't had experience with 24/96 yet so I'm looking forward to seeing what the true difference is.

Offline stantheman1976

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1093
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2007, 06:52:37 PM »
I posted this in the wrong section.  I through I was in Taperchat. 

Offline Charlie Miller

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2076
  • Gender: Male
  • Come On, Get Happy
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2007, 07:00:11 PM »
Analog sources don't have sample rates. You'll set it on your A>D.

also, some DVD's are 16/44.1
Audio Engineer - Steve Kimock Productions

Schoeps CMC6/MK4
(4) AKG 460's (CK1's CK8's CK63's)
Lunatec V2 + Lunatec V3
Sound Devices 744T

Offline JasonSobel

  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3329
  • Gender: Male
    • My show list
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2007, 07:11:21 PM »
Analog sources don't have sample rates. You'll set it on your A>D.

exactly.

also, some DVD's are 16/44.1

well, all DVD-Video discs must be either 48 kHz or 96 kHz.  they can be either 16 bit or 24 bit.
DVD-Audio discs, on the other hand, can be sampled at 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4, or 192kHz.  also at 16 bit or 24 bit.

Offline stantheman1976

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1093
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassette, Vinyl?
« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2007, 08:11:39 PM »
Do they have anything that compares to those number or are they basically off the chart and get converted to whatever rate when they are transferred?

Online jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3844
  • the data guy
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2007, 04:36:00 AM »
digital audio is an approximation of a continuous analog waveform. more numbers= better approximation. an analog signal has an essentially infinite sample rate, and a 'bit rate' could be roughly correlated to the s/n level of the source. 24/96 would prob be the practical limit of what youd need to use to get the most out of your cassettes or vinyl
team schoeps, dpa, benchmark, and zoom mostly... subject to change without warning

Offline stantheman1976

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1093
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« Reply #6 on: June 07, 2007, 05:47:27 AM »
That makes good sense.  Thanks.

Offline aegert

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 320
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« Reply #7 on: June 07, 2007, 08:26:11 AM »
The higher the res you take the more information you get and the bigger the file.. If you are editing the files 24 bit is a must...  :)

the rate of conversion is debatable.. I use 96 as I want to archive and listen at that rate and enable DVD-A. The 88.2 rate is probably just as good and dither to 44.1 better but... Selfish as I am I live in a 24bit world or MP3 for casual listening so for my listening pleasure and the listening pleasure of my mates 24/96 is it...

The converter is paramount in the transfer process only superseded by clock and in essence they are part of the same thing... It is the clocking capabilities of your converter and the clocks of subsequent stages or interfaces in recording that will most effect the quality.. This is the interface jitter discussion...

A great transfer station in my mind manages clocks through a synced clock line or a super clock where the interfaces and devices themselves synch with the stages before through the clock on the aes or s/pdif lines. This is the biggest diff in transfers...

Making a great transfer is monkey work it is all in the gear... Its the editing that is the magic :-)

A ;D
B&k 4022's > Grace Lunatec V3 > Self Built  Neutrik/ Mogami XLR to TRS > Korg MR1000

Schoeps CMT44's > Self Built Neutrik/ Tuchel 2 ch Snake > Switchcraft Phantom to T-power Adapters > Grace Lunatec V3 > Sound Devices 722

www.motb.org

The bus came by and I got on....

Offline Charlie Miller

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2076
  • Gender: Male
  • Come On, Get Happy
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2007, 03:21:53 PM »
Analog sources don't have sample rates. You'll set it on your A>D.

exactly.

also, some DVD's are 16/44.1

well, all DVD-Video discs must be either 48 kHz or 96 kHz.  they can be either 16 bit or 24 bit.
DVD-Audio discs, on the other hand, can be sampled at 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4, or 192kHz.  also at 16 bit or 24 bit.

This is not always true. The steve kimock band live DVD we sell is 16bit/44,1k.
Audio Engineer - Steve Kimock Productions

Schoeps CMC6/MK4
(4) AKG 460's (CK1's CK8's CK63's)
Lunatec V2 + Lunatec V3
Sound Devices 744T

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2901
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sampling rate of SB, Cassetted, Vinyl?
« Reply #9 on: December 25, 2007, 11:50:54 PM »
Just for the sake of those who read old threads ... the necessary sampling rate is determined by the bandwidth of the analog signals, and by your objectives in making the recording, since the sampling rate needs to be greater than twice the highest frequency that you wish to preserve. Since human hearing is limited to 20 kHz, a sampling rate of 44.1 kHz is adequate, while higher sampling rates are ... more than adequate.

Whether "more than adequate" translates into "sounds better" depends on the particular equipment that you're using. There's no inherent reason that a higher-than-necessary sampling rate should sound better, but sometimes it does for what we could call (to use the technical term for it) stupid reasons.

For example in the mid-to-late 1980s there was a widely-sold Sony studio DAT recorder that had separate analog filters for its three sampling rates (32, 44.1 and 48 kHz), and the filters that they happened to use at 44.1 sucked rather badly. Back then PCs weren't used in studios yet, there was no digital audio software like we have today, no sound cards that would let you digitize analog signals. This particular deck was the first piece of digital recording equipment most engineers ever got their hands on that would let them directly compare input vs. output at different sampling rates. Many engineers did make the obvious listening comparisons, and became thoroughly convinced that "48 kHz sounds a lot cleaner than 44.1 kHz" because they believed that they were hearing the difference between two sampling rates, rather than the difference between two analog filters of widely differing quality.

Turns out, if you installed good 44.1 kHz replacement filters (Apogee started out selling plug-in replacement filters for early Sony digital gear) then there was really no audible difference any more. So a lot depends on whether a particular piece of gear lives up to the potential of its medium or not. Back then a lot of gear didn't, but some people insisted on judging the CD medium or digital recording in general by those examples nonetheless. That's just a huge honking fallacy.

--Jerryfreak, please don't take this amiss but when you wrote "digital audio is an approximation of a continuous analog waveform. more numbers= better approximation. an analog signal has an essentially infinite sample rate, and a 'bit rate' could be roughly correlated to the s/n level of the source" I have to say that you were reiterating a well-known, fundamentally mistaken viewpoint. I can't claim to have a perfect safety record as a driver when in fact I don't drive; I have no safety record at all as a driver. Similarly, a continuous signal has no sampling rate at all--not an infinite one. If you had to assign it an Fs, it would be zero.

Your first sentence is spot on, though--digital recording is indeed one way of approximating a continuous waveform. In that respect it's just like analog recording, which isn't exact, either. The goal is to minimize the audible difference between input and output. Digital recordings produce continuous waveforms; the use of discrete-time sampling is an internal, technical step which should not be confused with the final result.

Once the requirement to sample at more than twice the highest frequency of interest has been met, the requirement can't be "more met" by making room for still higher frequencies, especially if they're not there; it's either met or it's not. Speaking of Mets, it's like, if you hit a home run ball, your team gets a point when you reach home safely. After that, though, running extra laps around the bases wouldn't earn your team any further points; you've already fulfilled the requirements, and you'd only be holding up the game.

--best regards
« Last Edit: December 26, 2007, 12:28:45 PM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.05 seconds with 51 queries.
© 2002-2020 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF