We can maybe drag this a bit further
, what about representation of non-sine waves (square or triangle)? Higher sample rates can better preserve sharp corners and have straighter lines, at higher frequencies even the amplitude of a triangle/square wave may not be correctly represented. Does higher sample rate better deal with non-sine waveforms? Could there be an audible difference in material containing these waveforms captured at lower/higher sample rates?Source
, and quote:
This would also suggest one benefit of sampling at higher rates such as 96kHz or 192kHz even though our ears cannot hear past 20kHz. A higher sampling rate can help preserve amplitude and harmonic accuracy for non-sine waves at high frequencies.
There could be more
, most of the referenced and quoted material so far seems to deal with the specific sample-rate/bit-depth being presented straight to the DAC (no further transformations/processing). What if there is further processing, even just a truncating/rounding or dithering volume slider (maybe a couple if your in Windows and the KM mixer), can something as simple as a bad volume transformation (not or badly dithered) have an audible effect at 16-bit? If you could produce an audible effect at 16-bit would the same transform performed at a higher bit depth be less noticeable (there would be a much smaller quantization error)? Is that a reason to use or at least re-sample to a higher bit depth if you want to do anything other than send the source straight to the DAC? Are higher bit-depth more robust against any unwanted/bad processing effects which may exist in the digital path?