Running Kemper at 96k

*I've not read every response. So, forgive me if I duplicated someone. Nor am I trying to pick a fight with anyone's post.

If there are any Eddie and the Cruisers fans - Bed sheets vs Fine Linens.

or Fine Dining vs Fast Food.

You would use 96 if you were making a timeless masterpiece. Most of us make b-sides for a one hit wonder's 3rd single, and 48 is fine.

Even if you mixdown the 96 to make your radio edit, you still are better off having started with the better source code.

The argument for or against one or the other is basically the same as vinyl vs cd (or now vs mp3). If you truly feel that vinyl is king and it sounds "so much better", you need 96 - more is better.

But if you are listening to music on your iPod at 128kbps with $10 earbuds... I spent too much time typing a response.

Quote from lightbox

f you can't contribute, why answer?

I contributed my opinion. That your ears couldn't really tell the difference (especially if you are older than me) and that Kempers sound great so what's the point of nitpicking it. Sounds like you have less to contribute on a Kemper forum and more to complain about.

Quote from ckemper

Your aliasing test is valid, and you can make clips of it.

I made a demo (and explanation) video:

Quote from ckemper

How do we solve this discrepancy?

We probably can't solve the issue (with the current hardware) and it's probably not even necessary. But still, it can be heard by a trained ear when he/she can compare. We can hear it if someone uses the Profiler to run other "instruments" with a simpler tone/frequency structure through it.

Anyway ... all I wanted to say and prove is that higher sample rates can make sense. I will still continue to play and enjoy my Profiler although it's not perfect.