Importance of sampling frequency on playing (not on recording)?

Dear forum people,

I read a post on higher vs. lower sampling frequencies for recording.

But my question is on Play only first. I have the option to chose Play output of 44KHZ, 48KHZ, or 96KHZ, but I don't seem to hear any difference. Should there be much between those two?
......
Then, if I record at 48KHZ, would it be better to have the Play at 48KHZ, or at the higher 96KHZ? Or does it matter?

I realize that the source sound should at least be better than the recording spec. But is it better if they are identical? Or is it better if it is a higher spec?

I also realize Bit depth is another issue, but that'd be aside from this Q. I am trying to clear from my head.

Thanks!

Hi and thanks a lot, CJ.

I did most of the time used the same 48K for play or record till I found I could also chose the audio Output of the card to be set to 96K, as said, and that I could record, with no incorrectness at 48K in spite of the difference.

However, this does not mean that what I may not be misguiding myself on that option.

The other thing is that I was considering that Playing at the higher speed maybe does not use as much resources as recording it, and that's because when I enable the higher play output to 96KHZ, as long as recording is still at 48K, I notice no resource problems (and I am aware of how quality impact resources if I get greedy.)

Yes, I've read in this forum that 44K is best for CD, but this card has many effects options that are for 48K/16bit in ASIO mode only, and at the moment, I am not yet doing CD's. Did from vinyl to CD a long time ago, so I'll re-visit what I have later.. Now it's about what I play realtime, and more dedication about learning correctly, and be as clear as possible, specially on Audio and recording, and using Sonar.

So I agree, with what you say, but don't trust myself here on some things yet...I do hope to find out, though, the truth on my situation here, specifically...Like if if it's really playing at 96K, to start with...So maybe I can find a way to verify that, first of all.

Now, If I can't notice, resource problem, or hearing difference, I'll probably put them the same: 48K again...The concern was also if I am only playing would I use the higher one? But I think I rather not keep changing things, if I can hear no big difference.

Thanks again.

CJaysMusic

96Khz is overkill and a waste of CPU, inlesss your doing opera or classical music.
Cj
 

 
What makes you think opera or classical deserves a higher sampling rate than something else?
 
 

bitflipper


44.1KHz is not "best for CD", it's required for CD. All CDs must be made to the same specifications for universal compatibility. The document that details those specs is called the "Red Book". Google "Red Book CD".

Playback software that supports multiple sample rates is usually smart enough to set the correct rate automatically. It is able to figure this out because the sample rate that a file was recorded at is written into the file's header.

So normally, the software determines the playback sample rate, not the  user. Good thing, too.

Hi and thanks for your comment bitflipper.

By 'best', I did not want to mean that other frequencies are acceptable, since as you say CD's are at 44.1K by standard.

Also what you describe, is pretty much how I created some CD's, by using some software that took care of resampling, automatically. Good thing indeed!

Thanks again!