higher sampling rates?

Hi as a newbie,
I am about to try to start recording from the DSD converted to PCM stream on the Denon 3910.
(An internal connection.) This is to back up my sacds.
I was informed the natural conversion is 176.2/24 bit within the Denon…
Just curious, are their any future plans to uprate this audacity to 88.2/ or 176.4 ? as 96Khz seems the highest in the current settings.
Using emu 1820M card on the PC. Alternative card may be audigy 2.

96kHz is the highest pre-set in Audacity though I believe it will currently go up to 200kHz. It is highly unlikely that your sound card will support sample rates as high as this.

Hiand many thanks for that. :slight_smile:
Ive just typed in the 176400 in the preset box and everything worked great.
Both my sound cards go to 200khz but I may have a problem using spidf with a 96khz limit?
on the quieter of the two cards.
Just curious, can I add my own presets somehow? Its Not that important obviously until I forget to reset?


I moved this thread moved to Recording Techniques - as I don’t see this as a Feature Request - I left a shadow copy behing in the FR section so that you can find it.


Really? Sound cards usually have a maximum sample rate up to 192kHz. Oh, but then we may be talking about different things. Even a low end sound card may accept digital data at 200kHz even though the sound card itself runs at a lower sample rate. Extra bits are just thrown away. You can test the actual frequency capability of your sound card by setting the project rate to 200kHz then generating a Chirp (Generate Menu) then set the recording input to “Stereo Mix” (“What U Hear” on SoundBlaster cards) and record the chirp on another track. Look closely (zoom in) on the recorded track. When you get up to the limit of what your sound card will handle you will notice that the recorded signal starts to modulate in peculiar ways.

Here is a screen shot of the spectrum from my sound card (which runs at 48kHz) trying to record a 20kHz sine wave:
window-Frequency Analysis-000.png
Professional recording studios will often use 44.1 or 48 kHz because the extra disk space and increased load on the system (and possibly increased latency) at higher sample rates are not justified by the marginal improvements to the audio frequency response. The difference between 96kHz and 192 will not even be noticeable to your dog so there is really little point going higher than 96kHz. Also, when recording real world sounds, the frequency response is limited by other parts of the equipment such as microphones. Audio recordings should be limited to below 20kHz. Above 20kHz there is no sound, just interference.

Well thanks for such information which I have heard numerous times , Unfortunatly I have been playing around with hifi for almost 50 years at the top end of the scale,using plenty of hi quality equipment and parts and developing top end electronics in general…I keep getting told by some people that you cannot hear? or even sense those higher frequencies and I demonstrate to them by asking them to play my sacd / dvda / cd back whilst Im blindfold and I can identify the source almost 100 percent.Funnily even some of the so called deaf muzzos then tell me they start to notice the differences.
Im personally not bothered about the extra storage as when I transfer them to DVDA discs I usually have loads of unused space on the unused part of the disc and therefore dont need to worry.Especially as Im getting way over the 80 minutes of an inferior CD and I dont have to put up with the severe sonic limitations of the CD.If your not bothered by it good for you.
To me the only problems with Bits being thrown away is when I record using 16 bits and losing frequencies being thrown away when using 44.1 sampling.
In addition I much prefer the benefit of lower distortion in its many forms. Cd was invented when technical (at a cost) limitations existed and even Sony accepted it was just very good Midi fi.I was there and involved.
It has come on in leaps and bounds since then BUT,
ps Ive naturally modded the sound cards with things like vishay resitors/schottky diodes/black gate caps etc.

I would certainly agree that CD quality is a compromise based on technological and economic constraints of the 1970’s. The example I posted earlier clearly illustrates the limitation of even a 48kHz sampling rate, and yes the difference is audible (subject to the rest of the equipment, the listening environment and good hearing). However, as with many things, the benefits of higher sample rates offer a diminishing return and are at the expense of increasing disadvantages. I’m pleased that you are already aware of all this, but it will still be useful information for some of our other readers.

By the way as Black Gate capacitors are no longer manufactured and are getting increasingly difficult to source I’d recommend Elna Cerafine caps as an alternative.
Other (even cheaper) options are Nichicon FG or even Panasonic FC and FM, but I like the Elnas if I can get them. Perhaps you have your own recommendations?

Its good that we in agreement and the comment about good hearing and listening is probably vital.
Yep the blackgates have gone and Rubycon have produced their own set of elcaps with the benefit of
their 20 odd years of development,even though it wasnt their technology from the outset.
Personally I only use BG in digital circuits as they do have a sonic signature in analogue.
As I used to test the sonic qualities of caps since the late sixties and was considered quite mad by some of the
big names in hifi,(similair with cables where it started).All your suggestions are good.Add ZA series Rubycon.
I still believe that all caps have microphony and sometimes (mostly) this is internal.
My preference are those hard to find oversized Elna Silmics 2.The earlier version was bass heavy by a tad(Another technical term often abused)
Only reason for 176.4 was stream out from Denon internal (mux) is that and the purity? thinking means one less conversion.
Wanna laugh ? Im even considering recording the ultrasonic DSD noise which is “edited out” by the pcm conversion and adding it back to see if it does have an effect.Do my super tweeters contribute to global warming?
Stop laughing.

I’m moving out of my field here but I thought that DSD noise was filtered out with a good old fashioned low-pass filter after D/A conversion rather than “edited out by the pcm conversion”. In either case I’d be very cautious about leaving it in / putting it back in. Apart from turning the tweeters into room heaters, the neighbours complaining that you’re messing with their listening to the Archers on longwave and the RSPCA coming round to sort out the pack of dogs gathering around your house you could get some really weird interference (comb) effects (like moire patterns)… hmm… could be interesting :smiley:

48000 does not actually go to 20KHz without tricks. It only goes out to 18.4. (Nyquist 2.6).