The AES/EBU are simply wrong on this point - just as they are about pin 2 +.
Obviously, 3 is "higher" than 2. (;
As for Lavry, their DA11 can lock to a 200 kHz sampling rate, however, their
ne plus ultra DAC is still the DA924, which is stuck at sub 176.4 kHz Fs
rates. Also, none of their ADC's are able to encode at higher than 96 kHz
On 4/11/12 2:06 PM, "D. Allen" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> isn't the aes-ebu archival standard 96/24?
> by release format, are you including the 192-96/24 releases available or just
> Lavry has product with 192/24 now.
> Dale Francis
> On Apr 11, 2012, at 13:40, Andrew Hamilton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I hope it's understood that what I wrote before in this thread was, "...the
>> pops and clicks are near square waves, in terms of their rise times..." -
>> not that a click or pop = square wave. They propagate suddenly. The clicks
>> which propagate more suddenly than 3.6 µs, when sampled at 88.2 kHz Fs, are
>> simply not encoded - whence the absence of perturbation. Still, that's a
>> nice fast sample rate which, according to Dan Lavry, is technically too fast
>> for perfect accuracy of the bass. 55 kHz is the current sampling speed
>> limit, according to the designer. 88.2 kHz is good for this test, however,
>> since we are talking about high frequency events. Still, the music may be
>> best at 48 kHz Fs, in spite of the worse Squarepushing. It was suggested to
>> me that program with only a few instruments (chamber music or solos?) would
>> be best at 48 kHz, and music more rich in overtones would possibly be better
>> at 88.2 kHz.
Serif Sound ♬ CD Premastering
➣ Dingbat Lacquer Sound Disc
2836 Spring Grove Avenue