Resampling 24/88 to 24/96 more harmfull then 24/88 to 24/44 ?

you could measure it yourself using wavespectra, as I did last year on the Reclock forum: http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=227357&postcount=3996

Note that resampling is mandatory in Reclock, so it's wiser to upsample. In your case, a wild guess would be that it's better to add a bit of extra infos than chop off half of it...but don't take my word for it, measure it yourself

it's Japanese software indeed: http://www.ne.jp/asahi/fa/efu/soft/ws/WS140.ZIP

the software is in english

you need to get foobar to output to a wave file, not sure that's possible?

then create a 88.2kHz 1kHz test tone as explained in the Reclock thread I referred to, resample it to 44.1 and 96kHz...and measure the THD/THD+N/SNR of the 2 resampled files in WaveSpectra. Do it also at 5kHz and 10kHz to comfort your results. The lowest THD+N wins...it'll most likely be 96kHz.

No home computer based measurement like Wavespectra is going to give you meaniful results.   Use foobar to ABX the too sample rates with your ears.  

In theory yes asyn resampling can be harmful because it has to insert notes that aren't on the original recording.

you got the quotes wrong my friend

well, you compare the test tones and you'll know which of 44.1 or 96kHz has the least distortion. the latter will prolly have clearer trebles than the former.

if you can't do that, you can't know which one is closer to the original, or maybe you could use some sprectrum analyzer...but resampling increases the THD/THD+N rates and decreases the SNR. As a last resort, trust your ears then

We're in the science forum, we like figures.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xabu 

 

You don't have 96000 something notes per second (Nobody who plays that fast ... )

It's an amplitude and frequency value which is inserted betwenn two existing values, isn't it? ... if not the whole file is calculated anew ...

 

Well, then I will just have to trust my ears

 Not full notes,  but data in the spdif bitstream which weren't there originally (rounded off numerically). .
 

resampling from 88.2 to 96 k doesn't "lose information" like downsampling to 44.1 would

rounding error for a single processing step is audibly irrelevant at 24 bit resolution - no recording microphone&preamp, studio ADC, audio DAC or headphone amp has 144 dB S/N 

But people can hear differences in which resampling algorithm is used so those numbers don't tell the whole story.  I recommend the Sox resampler,  it seems to have the best reputation,  my recording friends say you should always dither after resampling,  so I use Izotope Ozone MSB+ for that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal 

But people can hear differences in which resampling algorithm is used.

This being the science subforum can you point us to some level matched blind tests to affirm this then PRM can add them to his list, thanks !

There was a recent AES paper which compared 44.1 vs 88.2 vs 44.1 resampled to 88.2 but the results were inconclusive and the stats a bit iffy, there is a discussion of this on Hydrogen Audio

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=82264

the paper is $5 for AES members or $20 for outsiders, it is interesting if not anything like a final word.