New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 96/24 verses 192/24 sound quality
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Welcome to the Graham Slee Audio Products Owners Forum

 

Open to all owners plus those contemplating the purchase of a Graham Slee HiFi System Components audio product and wishing to use this forum's loaner program: join here (Rules on posting can be found here)

This website along with trade marks Graham Slee and HiFi System Components are owned by Cadman Enterprises Ltd

96/24 verses 192/24 sound quality
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Smokeyjoec View Drop Down
New Member
New Member


Joined: 07 May 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 17 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Smokeyjoec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: 96/24 verses 192/24 sound quality
    Posted: 09 May 2019 at 8:05pm
Hi, I tried to search but was unsuccessful in finding any information.  For the members who record their vinyl on computers, does it make sense to use 192/24 verses 96/24? Have any members compared, could you please provide your opinion.  Files sizes are quite bigger and I’m not sure of the benefits, if any?

Thanks again.

Joe


Edited by Smokeyjoec - 09 May 2019 at 8:07pm
Back to Top
Lucabeer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Location: Torino, Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 719 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lucabeer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2019 at 8:10pm
96/24 is overkill.

192/24 is pure nonsense, and a waste of space. 

Nyquist's theorem states that you have to sample at twice the maximum frequency that you want to capture. So 96 Khz is already plenty. 88 Khz would be the sweet spot. 

And my ears seem to confirm that. 
Back to Top
BackinBlack View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 Feb 2012
Location: Hinton, N'hants
Status: Offline
Points: 2139 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BackinBlack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2019 at 8:33pm
Originally posted by Lucabeer Lucabeer wrote:

96/24 is overkill.

192/24 is pure nonsense, and a waste of space. 

Nyquist's theorem states that you have to sample at twice the maximum frequency that you want to capture. So 96 Khz is already plenty. 88 Khz would be the sweet spot. 

And my ears seem to confirm that. 

I would most certainly agree with 192/24 being quite unnecessary. 96 or 88 kHz is all that is required, but a well recorded and mastered 44.1kHz CD can sound excellent, particularly when decoded by a Majestic. Big smile

Ian
Just listen, if it sounds good to you, enjoy it.
Back to Top
Lucabeer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Location: Torino, Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 719 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lucabeer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2019 at 8:49pm
44.1 is absolutely fine, when mastering is done correctly and (most important) filtering in the DAC is done correctly. 
Back to Top
Graham Slee View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Retired

Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Status: Offline
Points: 16314 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Graham Slee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2019 at 9:03pm
16 bits is overkill because the dynamic range of vinyl is only 12 bits.
That none should be able to park up and enjoy the view without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps
Back to Top
Smokeyjoec View Drop Down
New Member
New Member


Joined: 07 May 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 17 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Smokeyjoec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2019 at 9:19pm
Thanks everyone for your feedback. Smile

I’m actually on the same page as everyone.   I’m just still listening to ADC interfaces on the internet and will decide shortly.  I will probably use Audacity as the software on my MacBook Pro.
Back to Top
tg [RIP] View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 1866 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote tg [RIP] Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 May 2019 at 2:56am
Quote I will probably use Audacity as the software on my MacBook Pro.

Before you commit to that path, I would strongly recommend that you at least try Vinylstudio https://www.alpinesoft.co.uk/VinylStudio/download_mac.aspx
As a specialised LP & Cassette digitising package, it offers very specific support for everything you will wish to do, such as waiting for needle down before starting recording, splitting tracks, looking up track names and album artwork, non-destructive noise and click removal etc.

As to bit depth and sample rate, I usually record @ 24/88.2 for subsequent down sampling to 16/44 Redbook.  The vast majority of my digital collection is ripped CD and it seems fine to continue that standard.  It also makes it easy to burn LP recordings to CDR.



Edited by tg - 10 May 2019 at 4:23am
Tony G
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.083 seconds.