[Dargonplay]

I just need factual evidence that 192KHz make the sound worse, I've heard this many times but I DO can hear a difference between the two, I feel the 192KHz to be more of a quality warm sound, while 48KHz after hearing 192KHz sounds like a little bit more pitching, I could even call it Placebo effect, but I don't know, so here I am, asking to you Audiophile with wisdom and experience on the matter.

I got integrated Audio, the best one there is for integrated Audio (At least that says on the Asus Sabertooth MOBO) it's a Realtek ALC High quality sound and I got it paired with a nice Logitech Z623 2.1 System, which is capable of playing 192KHz at the highest sound depth and quality.

I've heard around that 192KHz just supersample the sound, somehow making it worse, My ears would like to disagree but that would be subjective, I'd like to know some actual objective facts about these two frequencies, or the most recommended frequency. I'm on 96KHz, but I'd like to use 192KHz for my PC games and songs.

What do you think? Should I just put 192KHz on my driver and call it a day? Or should I choose a different frequency without drawbacks? is there even any drawback to using 192KHz? The frequencies are all selected on the driver, picture below.

 

[astrallite]

There are no audio frequencies beyond 22KHz on standard Red Book Audio, increasing your sampling rate just requires more cpu cycles and burns more electricity. Your Logitech speakers dont even have tweeters and likely dont produce significant output above 16KHz anyway.

 

[jordanecmusic]

48000hz should be fine for you. If you don't have an external or dedicated audio card OR you dont have a good pair of headphones, you will not notice the difference.

for most its just a placebo.

 

[DrGroove]

Like 99% of music is 16 bit 44.1 KHz

The degradation of quality comes from forced upsampling, which is generally bad.

 

[Dargonplay]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrGroove

Like 99% of music is 16 bit 44.1 KHz

The degradation of quality comes from forced upsampling, which is generally bad.

What about 24 bits 44.1KHz, does it still upsample the sound?

Also, from your answer I take that unless I get songs at 192000Hz I should never pick that frequency, or it'll upsample it and degrade the quality, even for video games, right?

I thought that if I choose 192KHz and play songs at 48KHz those songs would only use 48KHz out of the 192KHz bandwitch, or they would get scaled up increasing somehow the sound quality, but now I see it's just the opposite.

 

[chinesekiwi]

the first paragraph means nothing with DBT.

Anyway, just 24/96 would be fine as it negates every possible negative from lower sampling rates / bit depths.
Upsampling up to this point is fine.

 

[hammong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dargonplay

nice Logitech Z623 2.1 System, which is capable of playing 192KHz at the highest sound depth and quality.

Saying your Logitech Z623 2.1 system is capable of playing 192 KHz audio is like saying my Volkswagen drives like a Lamborghini Countach. They both have 4 wheels and an engine, the similarity stops there. Your Z623 is analog only, so it's only going to play back 35-20 KHz analog signals (according to the Logitech specs), and won't even do that accurately due the component selection in the unit.

If you like the oversampling that 192 KHz 24-bit does for your 16-bit 44.1 KHz source audio, then by all means go ahead and use it. But the audio quality is entirely subjective, and in the "ears" of the beholder.

You can't make a low-resolution compressed audio sample from a game or MP3 sound any more accurate than it already is. You might be able to adjust the bass, treble, and stereo reverb to more to your liking though.

Greg

 

[chinesekiwi]

However if you are using controlling the volume digitally, using a higher bit depth is advantageous as it allows for more headroom as when you adjust the volume down, you are shedding bits (-6 dB being 1 bit) and volume up = adding bits. Using a higher sampling rate often results in less distortion from the source as well.

That is of course if the source doesn't auto-switch based on the digital file's sampling rate.

So just set it at 24/96 regardless.

 

[Dargonplay]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chinesekiwi

However if you are using controlling the volume digitally, using a higher bit depth is advantageous as it allows for more headroom as when you adjust the volume down, you are shedding bits (-6 dB being 1 bit) and volume up = adding bits. Using a higher sampling rate often results in less distortion from the source as well.

That is of course if the source doesn't auto-switch based on the digital file's sampling rate.

So just set it at 24/96 regardless.

Thanks, it clear most of the doubts, I'll be seething 24/96KHz, but... The guys above said my logitech Z623 aren't able to play over 35KHz frequency due to its analog nature, which somehow is limiting it to only 35KHz, so beyond 24/35KHz it wouldn't make any difference, or I am not understanding it right?

 

[chalkbluffgrown]

Quote:

Originally Posted by astrallite

Your Logitech speakers dont even have tweeters and likely dont produce significant output above 16KHz anyway.

Thank you Astralite. People constantly ask me about Logitech speakers such as these without ever using their eyes along with their ears.

Tweeters are not hard to spot......... And, no I am not picking on the OP of the thread.

 

[Tjj226 Angel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalkbluffgrown

Thank you Astralite. People constantly ask me about Logitech speakers such as these without ever using their eyes along with their ears.

Tweeters are not hard to spot......... And, no I am not picking on the OP of the thread.

How can people possibly miss the tweeters? That is all I ever hear on logitech speakers. Angry tweeters.

 

[DrGroove]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tjj226 Angel

How can people possibly miss the tweeters? That is all I ever hear on logitech speakers. Angry tweeters.

Maybe they were too concentrated on the 8 inch mud box

 

[Tjj226 Angel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrGroove

Maybe they were too concentrated on the 8 inch mud box

Mud box? You mean that it wasn't a foot massager? I thought logitech put that there to relax you while you were being brutally attacked by treble. Gosh, and all this time I thought logitech were being nice to me.

 

[Dargonplay]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tjj226 Angel

How can people possibly miss the tweeters? That is all I ever hear on logitech speakers. Angry tweeters.

For the most part they're pretty decent with little to no distortion at max volume, even with its 200 Wats RMS power, also despite being analog speakers there is no Buzzing at all, neither distortion, maybe I can thank my motherboard for that (990FXA-Sabertooth 2.0)

And for the price (150$) I believe there is no other THX 2.1 System that can beat these ones, on amazon for example, the reviews are near perfect, 4.7 Stars from thousands of reviews.

But getting back to the topic, I'm getting 24/96 since upsampling songs from 16/44 wouldn't make a negative difference in quality as 24/192 do, not a noticeable one, so I heard, weird thing is that when I set 24/96 I get audio stuttering from Prototype, but only that game, all others works fine.

 

[astrallite]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dargonplay

Thanks, it clear most of the doubts, I'll be seething 24/96KHz, but... The guys above said my logitech Z623 aren't able to play over 35KHz frequency due to its analog nature, which somehow is limiting it to only 35KHz, so beyond 24/35KHz it wouldn't make any difference, or I am not understanding it right?

You are not understanding it right. Sampling rate is about the bandwidth of frequencies a signal contains on the digital domain. A digital signal will carry frequencies up to half the sampling rate of the nyquist frequency, so a 96KHz sampling rate will carry frequencies up to 48 KHz. However a tweeterless design like your Z623s is only linear upto around 14-16KHz. A standard 44.1KHz sampling rate will carry frequencies up to 22.05KHz, which is already above the bandwidth of your speakers so further up-sampling is pointless. Now if the original sampling rate of some of your audio files are nonstandard 44.1 (like 96KHz) in theory its better to play it back at that sampling rate for the full effect however your speakers likely cant reproduce those higher frequencies anyway; in addition human hearing is almost nonexistent above 23KHz beyond a few select individuals.

Also the original intent of upsampling/supersampling was to remove brickwall filter noise/ringing at 22.05KHz, a frequency that some high end speakers can reproduce reliably, not to magically increase quality or whatever you were imagining. Its neither an issue with your speakers, nor is it going to add anything positive to the sound, in fact upsampling can cause rounding errors when its not a increase by a divisible multiple of the original sampling rate.

 

[Dargonplay]

Quote:

Originally Posted by astrallite

You are not understanding it right. Sampling rate is about the bandwidth of frequencies a signal contains on the digital domain. A digital signal will carry frequencies up to half the sampling rate of the nyquist frequency, so a 96KHz sampling rate will carry frequencies up to 48 KHz. However a tweeterless design like your Z623s is only linear upto around 14-16KHz. A standard 44.1KHz sampling rate will carry frequencies up to 22.05KHz, which is already above the bandwidth of your speakers so further up-sampling is pointless. Now if the original sampling rate of some of your audio files are nonstandard 44.1 (like 96KHz) in theory its better to play it back at that sampling rate for the full effect however your speakers likely cant reproduce those higher frequencies anyway; in addition human hearing is almost nonexistent above 23KHz beyond a few select individuals.

Also the original intent of upsampling/supersampling was to remove brickwall filter noise/ringing at 22.05KHz, a frequency that some high end speakers can reproduce reliably, not to magically increase quality or whatever you were imagining. Its neither an issue with your speakers, nor is it going to add anything positive to the sound, in fact upsampling can cause rounding errors when its not a increase by a divisible multiple of the original sampling rate.

So, 24/41KHz for these speakers then, thanks, I'm a total ignorant regarding sound, so I though these were like the best consumer 2.1 THX out there, guess I should had made a better research.

 

[Tjj226 Angel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dargonplay

For the most part they're pretty decent with little to no distortion at max volume, even with its 200 Wats RMS power, also despite being analog speakers there is no Buzzing at all, neither distortion, maybe I can thank my motherboard for that (990FXA-Sabertooth 2.0)

And for the price (150$) I believe there is no other THX 2.1 System that can beat these ones, on amazon for example, the reviews are near perfect, 4.7 Stars from thousands of reviews.

But getting back to the topic, I'm getting 24/96 since upsampling songs from 16/44 wouldn't make a negative difference in quality as 24/192 do, not a noticeable one, so I heard, weird thing is that when I set 24/96 I get audio stuttering from Prototype, but only that game, all others works fine.

There are. The klipisch pro media 2.1 is sometimes cheaper and is more respectable.

There are also plenty of awesome deals you can find at thrift stores for true blue vintage audio. I picked up a harman kardon receiver and a set of warfdale speakers for 70 bucks.

Dayton audio also makes a few options.

The hate for logitech comes from the fact that they are kind of like beats audio for PC speakers. They are horribly over priced for what they are. If you take a little bit of time to actually go buy passive speakers and an amp, chances are that you will have a far better sounding system.

Check out some of totally dubbed's videos on the celestion 3s vs the logitech speakers.