ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Down

Author Topic: 96 kHz ?  (Read 8165 times)

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6101
  • Audio Plumber
Re: 96 kHz ?
« Reply #70 on: November 15, 2017, 07:33:15 pm »

Not really.  The lower latency on higher frequency samplerates is usually a function of buffer size on the AD/DA,  basically twice the data of 48khz, half the buffer fill up time.

More than the buffer I think it is how many samples it takes to do the conversion. At 96k those samples go by in half the time.

Mac
Logged

Roland Clarke

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
Re: 96 kHz ?
« Reply #71 on: November 17, 2017, 07:04:04 am »

More than the buffer I think it is how many samples it takes to do the conversion. At 96k those samples go by in half the time.

Mac

I think we are saying the same thing?  Conversion is done in real time, but the chip buffers a fixed data amount, more data throughput, (twice the amount at 96 as opposed to 48) half the time.  Its easily seen when manufacturers produce gear that does multiple sample rates, speed generally halves.
Logged

Andrew Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1199
    • Check Check One Two
Re: 96 kHz ?
« Reply #72 on: November 17, 2017, 12:49:39 pm »

My understanding (from my research about external clocks) is that the conversions aren't done at the clock speed, but a multiple of them. Like 4x or 8x oversampling, so even with a console running 48k, the A/D conversions are being done at 192k or 384k, so I don't know that a console that is designed to run at 48k has higher latency JUST because of it's lower clock speed. I don't know for sure, but I think it has more to do with other processing inside the console, not the A/D.
Logged
-Andy

"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle..."

http://www.checkcheckonetwo.com
Saving lives through Digital Audio, Programming and Electronics.

Roland Clarke

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
Re: 96 kHz ?
« Reply #73 on: November 17, 2017, 02:28:10 pm »

My understanding (from my research about external clocks) is that the conversions aren't done at the clock speed, but a multiple of them. Like 4x or 8x oversampling, so even with a console running 48k, the A/D conversions are being done at 192k or 384k, so I don't know that a console that is designed to run at 48k has higher latency JUST because of it's lower clock speed. I don't know for sure, but I think it has more to do with other processing inside the console, not the A/D.

It depends.  Some consoles are using fpgas these process at machine code level and are extremely fast, but programming is far more complex and more so for complex processing.  Avid use a pc board (or at least did on Profile), this would be slower.  That aside consoles/interfaces that offer multiple sample rates working allow you too see what effect the AD/DA conversion is having on latency.  The fact that their published latency figures are close to halved by doubling sampling frequency shows that this is due to buffer speed.  Physical processing for audio, although it can be intense with complex algorithms, appears to be much lighter with eq, compression, gating.  Waves quote many of their processing plugs in the 3 sample range, next to nothing.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.037 seconds with 21 queries.