Rain


In which case, my original question could probably interpreted as - if your converters are of average quality and don't support higher sampling rates, could the higher frequencies actually be affected (even if just marginally) maybe because you're basically running them at maximum capacity? 

IOW, could better converters help reduce artifacts even at 44khz? Or is the notion of pushing them to their limits a bad analogy between analog and digital?

Then I'll interpret my original answer to say with the choice of cards you are talking about the converters will do just fine at any working rate.
 
It's not an issue of 'capacity', different converters will have marginal differences that may show up at different sample rates just because of how they are implemented, you couldn't determine with any realistic answer which would be the 'better' ones at any given rate, they would just be different and those differences would be minute.  And most likely any differences would likely be inaudible.
 
Switching to different sample rates to counter anomolies in DSP code in relation to the audio being processed is clouding the water here and is a seperate issue really.

Rain


In which case, my original question could probably interpreted as - if your converters are of average quality and don't support higher sampling rates, could the higher frequencies actually be affected (even if just marginally) maybe because you're basically running them at maximum capacity? 

IOW, could better converters help reduce artifacts even at 44khz? Or is the notion of pushing them to their limits a bad analogy between analog and digital?

It's dangerous to try and view how digital works in terms of experience with analog - sometimes they behave very similarly, but sometimes it's just totally and completely different.


A few points:

In terms of things like digital amp sims (and also some synths), anytime you create distortion (or certain synth waveforms) you are creating high frequencies which will cause aliasing in digital. But for this reason in the modern world (where CPU power is abundant) any competent programmer upsamples their amp sim/synth plugins internally to avoid this problem. So it's not clear why running at higher rates is of any benefit for modern plugins (assuming whatever "quality" settings they have are set to their highest settings). If it was beneficial to upsample even more, the programmers just should have made an even higher quality setting available. Older plugins may or may not be a different story.


For things like a high EQ shelf, the shape of the EQ curve at high frequencies will definitely vary depending on the sample rate. But don't assume "different" means "better" here (or even audible).


In general, any time a higher sampling rate is necessary for optimal processing, in the modern world any competent programmer would upsample as necessary.


An ADC contains an analog low pass anti-aliasing filter at the front end. Does your converter have different analog filters for its different sample rates, or does it just use the same analog filter (since it oversamples anyway)? Everything may be actually getting sampled identically at the exact same rate, with the only difference being a sample rate change (SRC) at the output. SRC's are not particularly problematic in the modern world.


And most importantly:

You could buy a real nice guitar/bass for the difference in price between inexpensive converters and new "high end" ones.

Where does head room come from?


Does one 12vDC wall wart have more head room than that other 12vDC wall wart?

You could have easily used your EE to elaborate on the how answers to the questions I just asked apply to the discussion.

You have chosen to criticize rather than consider.








What did that accomplish?

because it's a ridiculous question.

Do you make that claim because you don't know where head room comes from?

Or is it because you have some specific opinion that a question about head room, as it relates to converter quality, is ridiculous?

If you feel you would like to enlighten me as to where headroom comes from, then I will say, "YES, Mike, please tell me where "head room" comes from because I don't know." 
 
then feel free to elaborate how a wall wart can limit or enhance that headroom.  that's what I'd really like to know.

No I don't feel like presuming that I will be able to enlighten you with any thing.

It was a straight forward question... you did your Beagle thing all over it.




Any one, that wants to, can consider the question and may find some interest in it especially with regards to the context of comparing the performance of seemingly identical converters after they are placed in specific appliances.


 

regards,
mike

exactly as I expected.  and thus the snark award.