(07-21-2020, 09:18 PM)MartinB Wrote: I am surprised to not read any recommendation about standardization of sampling rates and number of bits per sample.
From my simple understanding, differences in sampling rates should lead to additional effort and artefacts during resampling.
Any hints / comments / experiences ?
Reducing latency by increasing the sampling rate to extreme values like 96 kHz does not make sense to me
A pertinent point Martin,
Sadly, I can not offer a clear answer - just a related experience - but, let's pursue it and we might get some clarity in the process:
- I connect to J-K with a Zoom H4 i.e. ASIO interface via a USB cable
- ASIO provides two sampling rates 44.1 and 48 KHz
- there is no major or audible quality difference between the rates
- J-K must have an interface that is either written or adopted from elsewhere to synch and work with the sampling rate
- in my opinion both rates should work identically
- however if, 48 KHz rate works better it must mean a better (more stable) code is written by J-K
- so here is my question to J-K users: which sampling rates works better and why i.e. clearer sound, less drop outs, etc?
- The second point is 'Audio Frames'
- in File/Audio Properties/Audio Boost/ it is possible to adjust 'Audio Frame' size from 20 to 10 to 5 and even to 1 (in mSec)
- a general notion is that shorter (smaller) audio frame makes for a better connection, sound, etc.
- can somebody explain the math here...?!
1. how is a shorter (smaller) audio frame relate to audio quality and the sampling rate?
2. what is the relation$p of audio frames and the sampling rate
3. if one adjusts audio frame in the J-K Audio Properties, does one have to adjust it in the ASIO device as well?
- none of this should be difficult and yet with the J-K this is a Pandoras box!
Cheers, Lex