24 bit 96khz best to work with?

[mojobone]

http://bcove.me/b4fep7ct

This is one of the best videos or papers I've seen on ADC's. The Dan Lavry white papers is another one.
http://www.lavryengineering.com/pdfs/la ... _audio.pdf

As much as I respect Dan Lavry and enjoy his hardware, I think it bears mentioning that he has a dog in this fight. I agree, in general with much of what's in that whitepaper, but there's a rebuttal for almost every declarative statement he makes, so I disagree on some of the particulars; one being the idea that greater data precision can have a deleterious effect on the sonic accuracy of a PCM digital audio file. I'm also pretty certain that greater accuracy can sound worse, but I still believe accuracy is worth pursuing, for its own sake, up to the point of diminishing returns, but the argument is about where that point lies.

There is probably a point at which finer degrees of differentiation become redundant, as regards to distinctions even the best-trained humans can make; objectively, German Shepherds have better hearing than us, and within a generation, it will be possible to have them mix our music, but I suspect they don't enjoy the same sorts of organized noise as their handlers.

[Len911]

Calling 192khz more accurate fails to consider the effect of "ultrasonic intermodulation distortion".

Not to mention it's effect on analog components that are the front and back end of all digital systems.

Sensitivity to less dominant frequencies and having them impact the dominant frequencies seems to me to be in need of filtering. Much like a sensitive microphone that pops the p's and in need of de-essing, accurate but not natural.