Sample rate 44100, 48000 or 96000 when using 320kbps?

[TheAnt]

As a demonstration of how using 44,100Hz loses information:

If your source track is 44,100Hz and you play it at +4, in one second you will have:

44,100 x 1.04 = 45,864 samples

If you then play that out at 44,100Hz you lose 1,764 samples every second.
If you play it a high sample rate you lose nothing.

When you apply EQ and effects and key lock there is a huge amount of extra information generated.

[DJ Shifty Sheep]

Most people are completely missing the point, I would expect the higher sample rate i.e. 96000Hz(more info) to take longer to process then 48000Hz (less info). But i'm getting it the other way around.

48000Hz with a buffer of 128 = 8.4ms
96000Hz with a buffer of 128 = 4.2ms

Please people stop trying to explain the basics and look at my numbers! It doesn't make sense to me, for the 48000Hz to have a larger latency.

[itskindahot]

^^^ you still don't get it. probably the reason is traktor is reporting things in a confusing way. traktor does NOT show your system's actual latency but it shows you what are essentially buffer sizes. please re-read my post.

what you observe is a reduction in the amount of music (in units of time) that is stored in the buffer.

to give a drastic example: I install traktor on some 10 year old, super-slow computer. after 30min *sweat*, the installation finally goes through. i now set the buffer in the audio settings panel to 64. And WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAM!!!! Traktor now shows super-low latency on my lemon of a computer.

if you think this is the computer's actual latency, you are wrong. if you think the actual latency is much higher and at current settings we'll get nothing but glitches and drop-outs, you are right.

[TheAnt]

Most people are completely missing the point, I would expect the higher sample rate i.e. 96000Hz(more info) to take longer to process then 48000Hz (less info). But i'm getting it the other way around.

48000Hz with a buffer of 128 = 8.4ms
96000Hz with a buffer of 128 = 4.2ms

Please people stop trying to explain the basics and look at my numbers! It doesn't make sense to me, for the 48000Hz to have a larger latency.

Your numbers are correct, that is the way it is. What is wrong is your assumption. The answers have been given to you, it is up to you if you want to understand them.

[DJ Shifty Sheep]

^^^ you still don't get it. probably the reason is traktor is reporting things in a confusing way. traktor does NOT show your system's actual latency but it shows you what are essentially buffer sizes. please re-read my post.

what you observe is a reduction in the amount of music (in units of time) that is stored in the buffer.

to give a drastic example: I install traktor on some 10 year old, super-slow computer. after 30min *sweat*, the installation finally goes through. i now set the buffer in the audio settings panel to 64. And WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAM!!!! Traktor now shows super-low latency on my lemon of a computer.

if you think this is the computer's actual latency, you are wrong. if you think the actual latency is much higher and at current settings we'll get nothing but glitches and drop-outs, you are right.

The setting are different in the S4 version of Traktor.

You can set the sample rate & buffer, traktor then tells you the:-

Processing time & the output then adds them to give you the over all. (and its fairly accurate) also I have tested the settings on my machine to make sure its stable (so I know the latency is correct).

The 96000Hz setting with the same buffer size OUTPUTS faster then the smaller sample rate of 48000Hz with the same buffer size.

"Latency is a measure of time delay experienced in a system" from (wikipedia) I.E. how long it takes from me moving the jog-wheel for it to be processed and outputted.

Why would it make sense for the higher sample rate 96000Hz (more infor and higher cpu usage) be more responsive!

Also please explain how Padi use's a macbook with less RAM & a S4 but has a much lower output time.

Sample Rate: 44100
Buffer: 128

Procesing: 2,9ms
Output: 2,3ms
Overall: 5.2ms

If I could get my output time down my numbers would read:-

Sample rate 48000Hz
Buffer 64
Processing: 1.3ms
Output: 2.7ms
Overall: 4.0ms

But this is what I have:

Sample rate 48000Hz
Buffer 64
Processing: 1.3ms
Output: 5.7ms
Overall: 7.0ms

OUTPUT 5.7ms when I was using Serato scratch live I had a stable latency of 5ms (my output time is more than that now without adding the processing time)

To reiterate, Why is my out put time so high?

[Remote]

Okay I'll give this another bash but let's try an analogy this time...

Say traktor is a car, the sample rate is the speed traktor is traveling at and the buffer size is the tracks length.
Traktor if traktor goes at 48000 or 98000 on the 128 track, which one is going faster?

On the padi_04 thing, I too get a different number to him. I get:

48000
64
1.3 5.7 7.0

Meaning I probably have a different Macbook to him (I have a 09 unibody 13)

[DJ Shifty Sheep]

The way I see it is, 96000Hz is more info to process than 48000Hz so it should take longer & I'm right it do's take longer to process but...... even though it processes 48000Hz faster it still takes longer to output (I know sample rate just sends more info, but its signal isn't any faster traveling down the wire), So why the massive slow down in output time on what I see as the smaller task(less info).

96000Hz = More information to process
48000Hz = Less information to process

I just want someone to explain whats happening at the output stage & not the processing stage, as the processing stage acts as I would expect (the larger sample rate of 96000Hz takes longer to process) but it outputs faster than the 48000Hz?

Surly a longer processing time should equate to a longer output time!

Also the buffer should make no difference once its been processed as the buffer is the safety net for pre processing.

[Spikerocker31]

Attachment 22066

[Spikerocker31]

Untitled2.jpg

[Sleeper0013]

Why, tempo adjustment, stretching, at 44.1 your sound will tear up. 96k, you can get away with larger tempo adjustments. Studio techs will use 88.2 because it dithers down to 44.1 well.