sample rate conversion quality issues


lets say you record a performance to DAT, hard drive, whatever, at 48/24, and then you convert it using good software to 44.1/16.

is this 44.1/16 recording any worse in quality than if you were to record the original performance at 44.1/16?

why or why not?
ketchup

Showing 2 responses by pdl

FYI - You can not record to a DAT @ 24 bit. Only 16 bit @ 44.1 or 48.0 kHz......

Regarding your other question -> you will get the best resolution when you record at the highest rez rates possible. A recording made at 24 bit/44.1 khz (and then downsampled to 16 bit/44.1 for playback) should sound noticeably better than a recording made at 16 bit/44.1 khz. However, you want to make sure that you are using good digital conversion software (or hardware) that does not introduce artifacts when downsampling. Also, make sure that your software/hardware dithers to 16 bit and does not truncate the data when converting to 16 bit.

paul
Alex,

The original poster asked if a 24 bit recording converted to 44.1 with good software would sound worse than the same recording originally mastered at 16/44. If we can agree that "good" software means there won't be any truncating or artifacts introduced by the downsampling, I fail to see how the downsampled recording would not be superior in resolution to the one mastered at 16/44. In my experience, even recordings made at 16/48 and dithered to 16/44 with good gear sound (slighter) better than those mastered at 16/44.

Paul