Noisy wavs at 96kHz vs normal 44kHz / 48kHz wavs

Anyone here familiar with "The Emperor's New Clothes"?

Test 1 Test 2

To the people who know if the Emperor's wearing clothes: one of these tests was recorded at 9632 (on AA 1.5) the other at 4832 (on AA2.0). I hear one as more full / more present than the other which sounds slightly hard / glassy. Can you tell the difference? Go ahead. Try asking someone young who doesn't have ear damage. Don't be sarcastic either when you do so. You might find the Emperor was wearing khaki and you were blinded by the sun.

There's more actual HF in track one than in track two, but the levels are very similar. Since both tracks are low-quality 128k MP3s, and even I can tell that there's no extended HF at all, I'm not sure what this proves - except that you can use your MONA as an extremely subtle effect!

I could achieve the same result exactly by sampling at 32kHz in the first place, I reckon, since none of the audio extends beyond 16kHz except as the odd artefact.

And I could make far more difference to the sound by moving the mics than the difference (if there really is any) between the tracks that sampling at different rates causes.

There's more actual HF in track one than in track two ..... you can use your MONA as an extremely subtle effect!

Steve G

You Win!!!!!!
Test 1 = 96 kHz source recorded with AA 1.5
Test 2 = 48 kHz source recorded with AA 2.0

Both are very similar. I can see that. When I record, then bounce down to CD or MP3 - the final result sounds better when source is the higher sample rate. It's a Mona effect I'm sure. If / when I get my hands on Apogee or Lavry converters I'm sure I will know what you are talking about. Furthermore, the song / band must have impact. If/when  that is recorded well - the job's done!!!

Headphone of the 4 gtrs sounds different than speakers!!!! What about the place I record? It's a studio / where I live. I have a loft and a huge Italian leather couch. Carpet all over the place (brownsone apt w/California attitude in NYC - lots of wood / light / black leather). I'm sure all is not perfect - far from it - for me to really tell what I'm hearing. Possibly certain node frequencies are missing here where I listen to music?

Can't use AA 2.0 for anything but 44.1 kHz / 48 kHz. I liked editing at 96 kHz. Editing at 48kHz 32 bit is probably just fine - it's the bits that count: 32 v.s.16. Right?

Now on to mixing a song for a commercial presentation!!!!!!!!!!! Must take trks off analog 4 trk reel (Teack 3340) and mix w/Adobe to MP3.
Three hours to deadline!!!!!!!!!!

There's more actual HF in track one than in track two ..... you can use your MONA as an extremely subtle effect!

 It's a Mona effect I'm sure. If / when I get my hands on Apogee or Lavry converters I'm sure I will know what you are talking about.

Well I have to say that if you can reliably tell the difference on a 128k MP3 file, it's time to get a new soundcard anyway!

I listened to both before reading further and I did notice straight away that Track 1 had a much better stereo sound (Beyer DT770 headphones) and Track 2 was a bit flatter - should've had exactly the same music on both.

Added Nero 7.1 to burn and verify DVDs. Nero 6 didn't verify DVD's that were burned correctly. AA 1.5 now had severe noise in 9632 recorded wav files. Removed Nero 7.1 / cleaned registry JV16PT / CCleaner to restore clean 9632 recording with AA1.5.

What I really should do is clean install the OS / WinXpPro and add in CEP 2.1 / AA 1.5 (upgrade) / AA2.0 (upgrade) - and see if/when recording is clean at 632 w/o any software to corrupt the echoaudio ASIO driver for MONA.

[AA 2.0 / 9632 / noisy recording changes pitch / tempo when downsampled to 4416.]

Made slipstreamed WXPPro / SP2 install CD. Killed partition on drive with OS. Reinstalled XPPro. Did this to have fresh install. AA2.0 demands internet activation, so had to install NOD32 antivirus. Comodo Firewall. Only other programs installed: CEP2.1 RC6 / AA1.5 / AA2.0 / Diskeeper 10.

///////////////////////////////////////

Formatted HDD. Reinstalled XPPro/SP2 - What sacrifice to find truth..... Is SP2 causing interference? Hate to keep formatting HDD to find out.

AA2.0 records wav fine - if the guitar is NOT played when wav is armed for recording, otherwise the wav (with guitar) is extremely noisy. So anyone here who makes a test wav recording at 9632 in AA 2.0 might think all is fine. Add in a live instrument (god forbid) and the world turns upside down fast. Great!!! Who needs guitar in a rock song anyway? Let silence be king. AA 1.5 is rock solid /A+ as always.

Mona Console tested at 9632 and again at 4832. All times: "the sample rate is unlocked."

Is this driver or software action?
1) AA 2.0 / 9632 / noisy recording changes pitch / tempo when downsampled to 4416.
2) An AA 2.0 / 4832 recording when downsampled to AA 2.0 / 4416 retains full tempo / pitch of original recording.

AA2.0 says it's not their problem. EchoMona says it's not their fault. MONA soundcard works at 96kHz 32bits with AA 1.5. If it's a driver problem, why tempo / pitch shift changes when downsampling 96kHz 32bits to 48kHz 32bits in AA 2.0?

What can you tell from the sound of the noise?

Guitar = Clean Electric / DI Countryman FET 85 into MONA via XLR input CH 3.
Note: these are actual wav files recorded in AA 2.0. Kept short to illustrate point as well as conserve space / download time.

http://www.liquidfusion.net/AA2.0/9632__Track_3_002.wav
Blank (reference) 96 kHz 32bits

http://www.liquidfusion.net/AA2.0/4832_9632__Track_3_004.wav
Pitch / Tempo Change
Downsampling Noisy 96 kHz 32 bits to 48 kHz 32 bits

http://www.liquidfusion.net/AA2.0/9632__Track_3_004.wav
Recording Clean Electric Guitar:
Result = Noisy wav at 96 kHz 32 bits

http://www.liquidfusion.net/AA2.0/4832__Track_03_003.wav
Blank (reference) 4832

http://www.liquidfusion.net/AA2.0/4832__Track_03_004.wav
Recording Clean Guitar at 48 kHz 32 bits