Rockbox Technical Forums

Support and General Use => Audio Playback, Database and Playlists => Topic started by: znorter on April 08, 2008, 05:37:18 PM

Title: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: znorter on April 08, 2008, 05:37:18 PM
Hi!
Do you know if RockBox for iPod is able to playback .FLAC and/or .WMA and/or .WAV files at 24bit/96...or higher formats?
very thank you ;)
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: preglow on April 08, 2008, 06:04:14 PM
Rockbox plays back files of higher bit depth and higher sample rates than 16 bits and 44100 Hz just fine right now, but not with full quality. Here is what happens:
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: znorter on April 09, 2008, 03:49:04 AM
Thank ypu, Preglow.

So, "the problem" is (are) DACs, 'cause Rockbox read all the HIRES formats also installed on iPods, right?

BUT, if the iPod is connected via USB (or another portable player that has this output) to an hiend DAC that accept 24/96?
You think I will lsten the hires without truncate something?

Again, thank you, Luca
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: preglow on April 09, 2008, 10:17:25 AM
Well sure, if a player is able to send it's audio via USB to another DAC, anything could be possible. I don't really know the limitations of the USB audio protocol, though.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: znorter on April 09, 2008, 03:26:12 PM
Hi, preglow.
This is the protocol link, I am not able to understand IF...24 bit...is possible... ???

http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs/audio10.pdf
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: znorter on April 09, 2008, 03:33:25 PM
FIND!!!

Thanks to Apogee forum (and Google:) this is a quote:
Quote
   Can the Mini-Me handle 24/96khz sampling rates through USB?
   Though the Mini-Me can convert at sample rates up to 96 kHz via the AES and SPDIF output, the USB driver can accommodate only sample rates up to 48 kHz. Because of the bandwidth limitations of the USB bus 96khz recording is not attainable.
POSTED:    2003-07-11 12:38:11

So...NO, the USB is NOT able to drive 24/96 :(
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Chronon on April 09, 2008, 03:44:05 PM
Please remember not to double post.  
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: saratoga on April 09, 2008, 03:48:29 PM
Hi, preglow.
This is the protocol link, I am not able to understand IF...24 bit...is possible... ???

http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs/audio10.pdf

Maybe the USB 1 spec isn't the best place to look for USB 2 audio.

So...NO, the USB is NOT able to drive 24/96

They're obviously referring to that specific (USB1) device.  USB2 has enough bandwidth to carry dozens of 24/96 streams.

That said, 24/96 playback is pretty useless anyway.  Just use 16/44.1 and stop worrying.  
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: znorter on April 09, 2008, 06:19:55 PM
Ok...thank you.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Lornecherry on February 04, 2009, 05:46:33 AM
Over at Headfi, there's been quite a bit of discussion about this (by "this", I mean 24/96 from the ipod), since, although itunes fully supports 24/96 WAV, the native firmware on the ipod does not.

24/96 is especially relevant now with so many Wadia iTransports being sold and now in the hands of would-be audiophiles. Because the Wadia bypasses both the ipods's internal amp and DAC (thus outputting bit-perfect digital); it seems the perfect medium for some the great 24/96 material now available.

The Wadia truly is the missing link in making the ipod equivalent to a high end transport. With Wadia releasing a $1500 DAC/headphone amp combo soon (shown at CES) the need for someone to develop native 24/96 support grows.

(Those that are familiar with Wadia DACs in general (they call them decoding computers) know how wonderful they sound and that ... most of their stuff is north of $6K.)

The only other portable player to support true digital out is the older iRiver 120/iHP-140, but with the release of the new Ibasso D-10 DAC/AMP (supports optical in and is the size of the iRiver) there is also a movement towards higher end portable devices with true audiophile capabilities.

If a developer were to take on this project (24/96) WAV or FLAC; you'd earn a very strong following over at headfi :).
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: znorter on February 04, 2009, 02:45:54 PM
Thanks for the feedback...
...but I hope "they" will see more accurate the present digital music that is 24/192!
All the "audiophile" version of liquid music is and will be 24/192...
ciao

L.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: saratoga on February 04, 2009, 08:20:09 PM
Theres no one here with a $1500 Ipod accessory, so if you want to use it, you or one of your fellow owners will likely have to reverse engineer how the device works and implement support for it.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: znorter on February 05, 2009, 11:29:11 AM
I am NOT (and happy to be not) one of them...but..."all the world is a stage!"
 :)
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: saratoga on February 05, 2009, 02:48:23 PM
Well, if you don't have the device, and we don't have the device, theres no sense posting about it here.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: znorter on February 05, 2009, 02:58:21 PM
ok...admimistrator in chief:
delete me...
bye
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: st8v8n on February 06, 2009, 06:34:13 AM
Bit depth: Rockbox will decode all formats to as high a bit depth as possible for both lossy and lossless formats. All internal processing is also done at 32 bits bit depth. However, all current targets truncate to 16 bits at the output. This can be fixed if someone cares enough about it to do some programming, but the DACs in current targets really aren't good enough for this to make much sense.


anybody please tell me is this the reason why i always feel better with rockbox sound quality(an old topic  talking about this.. http://forums.rockbox.org/index.php?topic=6139.0 )

sorry for off topic...

~~
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: soap on February 06, 2009, 05:28:12 PM
Is there any reason to believe this device does anything other than use the iPod as a USB hard drive and get track info from the iPod database file?
I, personally, find this easier to believe than a super-secret way to stream high-bitrate audio through the USB port.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: saratoga on February 06, 2009, 06:25:55 PM
anybody please tell me is this the reason why i always feel better with rockbox sound quality(an old topic  talking about this.. http://forums.rockbox.org/index.php?topic=6139.0 )

Its not.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: dreamlayers on February 06, 2009, 09:20:39 PM
I looked at some info online just for amusement purposes.  I wouldn't actually want to get any of those things or develop support for them; I just find it amusing to see how "audiophile" products get hyped and marketed using pseudoscience.  In some cases, I'd find it more respectable if they asked you to send a lot of money and promised to in return bless your music so it sounds better.  At least then they'd make it clear that they're not making scientific claims.  Anyways...

The Wadia iTransport can apparently get digital data from the iPod Classic and the newer nanos.  I suppose they are able to output SPDIF and it's just an overpriced dock.  For other iPods (the ones supported by Rockbox), it goes into "extended interface mode" where the "click wheel interface" is not available.  That means they haven't been able to get digital audio out from those iPods, and so they just use the iPod as a USB mass storage device.  In this mode you get a horrid simplistic interface:  you can either continue playing what you were playing via the iPod's interface or you can play everything in all tracks mode.  Here's a PDF FAQ (http://www.wadia.com/products/transports/170i/iTransport_FAQ.pdf) and PDF manual (http://www.audiac.nl/wadia-170i-transport/includes/170i-Manual.pdf).  Here's a page with some low res pics of the insides, and some ridiculous mods (http://www.asi-tek.com/wadia2.html).  Oh, and the thing is not HIRES:  I read that it always outputs 16 bit and 44.1 kHz!

If you want digital out from earlier iPods, you need another overpriced gadget, the MSB iLink (http://www.sound4sale.com/iDock.php).  The iPod needs to be modded for that.  I guess they connect I2S to dock pins.

The only reasonable related task that I can think of is support for streaming audio to a USB audio device.  That would allow both reasonable use, like streaming to USB wireless headphones, and unreasonable use, like streaming to a USB audio device which is built from vacuum tubes instead of solid state electronics.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Lornecherry on February 08, 2009, 03:56:03 PM
First, let me state that I'm not trying to invade your space with an audiophile nose-in-the-air attitude. $1500 is certainly not excessive with respect to a music server (with a DAC and headphone amp (which is what the Wadia system actually is.) What it is not, is a glorified ipod doc with a Wadia nameplate. And the Wadia doc is not $1500 ...it's $379 ...the matching DAC and built-in Ray Samuels headphone amp is $1500.

Secondly, commenting on the sound of a system or device without hearing that device elicits very little in the way of constructive criticism. Quite simply, the Wadia/ipod combination replaces a fairly high-end CD player in its functionality and sound quality. If you do get the chance to listen to the Wadia tapped into a decent sound system, it may well change your opinion of both what is possible on the ipod and the need for CD player whatsoever. It's that good.

Taking it to 24/96 is simply the next logical step; hence my questions here. That would allow DVD-A and vinyl ripping. With 100's of LPs this is not a silly fascination, but rather an attempt to get high-end sound on a portable device.

Again, I'm sorry if I ruffled a few feathers ... I'm simply questing for the best sound possible, as I know the capabilities of portable music are just beginning to be realized with devices such as the Wadia, the iMod and the various headphone amps that are becoming quite popular. - Lorne
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: saratoga on February 08, 2009, 04:42:53 PM
First, let me state that I'm not trying to invade your space with an audiophile nose-in-the-air attitude. $1500 is certainly not excessive with respect to a music server (with a DAC and headphone amp (which is what the Wadia system actually is.) What it is not, is a glorified ipod doc with a Wadia nameplate. And the Wadia doc is not $1500 ...it's $379 ...the matching DAC and built-in Ray Samuels headphone amp is $1500.

With all due respect, if you pay that much for a DAC, you're probably being ripped off.  High quality 24 bit DACs in this frequency range cost dollars, not hundreds of dollars.  Delivering a few mAs worth of current at low frequencies with 100dB of SNR is not a particularly expensive proposition given modern IC costs.

Again, I'm sorry if I ruffled a few feathers ... I'm simply questing for the best sound possible, as I know the capabilities of portable music are just beginning to be realized with devices such as the Wadia, the iMod and the various headphone amps that are becoming quite popular. - Lorne

I don't think you've ruffled any feathers, and I'd certainly welcome support for a device like this if someone provided the code.  Its just amusing that people buy junk like this, thats all. 

For kicks though, if you've got one these things, you should run RMAA on it and see just how well it works.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: ElEsido on February 19, 2009, 03:17:27 AM
Excuse my question, if this has already been mentioned i didn't find the relevant post.

What quality is being put through optical out of a rockboxed iriver H1xx when you play a 24/96 or a 24/192 lossless file?

Thanks
ElEsido
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: nc8000 on February 19, 2009, 09:20:18 AM
Excuse my question, if this has already been mentioned i didn't find the relevant post.

What quality is being put through optical out of a rockboxed iriver H1xx when you play a 24/96 or a 24/192 lossless file?

Thanks
ElEsido

I would also love to know the answer to this as I have tried to download som 24/192 flac files from Linn Records and they play fine in RockBox on the H140 but what is actually output on the optical out, 16/44 or full 24/192 or something else ?
This is feeding the optical in on the iBasso D1 and soon iBasso D10 dac/heaphone amp combos.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Febs on February 19, 2009, 09:21:45 AM
Read the second post of this thread.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: ElEsido on February 19, 2009, 10:33:45 AM
The second post of this thread talks about "the output" and "all current targets [note: I believe this means the players?] truncate to 16 bits at the output" So please help me understand if the following is correct:


File --> Internal DAC of the Player --> Internal Amp of the Player
      \
        --> Optical Out SPDIF  --> External DAC  --> External Amp

What Rockbox sends to either the internal DAC or the Optical Out is a 16bit signal which is in any case resampled to 44100? Or is a higher bitrate/frequency signal sent to Optical out while the internal dacs of the targets cut it down to 16bit?
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: nc8000 on February 19, 2009, 12:03:13 PM
Read the second post of this thread.

I did read that but need the same clarification as ElEsido since many external dacs can handle better than 16/44, and anyway that post is getting on for being nearly a year old so something could have changed or has no development happened on RockBox for nearly a year  ::)
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Chronon on February 19, 2009, 04:15:21 PM
The Rockbox playback engine currently resamples everything to 16-bit/44.1KHz Stereo - because it was written for the iriver H1x0/H3x0 which can only handle that samplerate.

The DACs in the ipod should be capable of a range of samplerates up to 96KHz, as well as 24-bit output.  But the playback engine needs adapting to use it.

As far as I know it's this 16bit/44.1kHz Stereo data that's sent to both the internal DAC and the digital line out. 

I'll leave the quote.  But please note this is an old post and I'm not sure what has changed since then.  To be sure about this you should follow Llorean's advice below. 

anyway that post is getting on for being nearly a year old so something could have changed or has no development happened on RockBox for nearly a year  ::)

nc8000, I hope I don't need to point out the logical fallacy in what you posted.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Llorean on February 19, 2009, 04:19:19 PM
Why don't you plug it into something and listen to it to see if it outputs at the right bit/samplerate? Surely you ought to be able to hear the difference easily, if this matters so much. And if you can't hear the difference, why does it? Honestly, I think that since the digital output is before the DAC it can be at higher bit and sample rates, but I'm not certain and in the time you guys have spent asking about it, you could've taken five seconds and checked.

As for whether Rockbox has been developed in the last year in a way that may have changed this: There's a changelog. It's updated constantly. One thing that definitely isn't our job is to go and read through the changelog for you. Nobody can keep track of all the changes of Rockbox because there are many people working on it. If you want to know if something has changed, spend your own time reading the change log. Please don't ask or expect us to do it for you.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: nc8000 on February 20, 2009, 06:31:37 AM
Sorry to have bothered you lot. With such arrogant and selfrightous pricks like you I see the folly in ever coming here in the first place and will make sure never to do so again.   ??? ::) >:(
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Llorean on February 20, 2009, 06:43:31 AM
I'm sorry that you chose to misinterpret it as such. It was an honest answer meant to generaly point you in the right direction, and it really is unreasonable to expect someone else to research and repeat for you updates that are already posted publicly.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Chronon on February 20, 2009, 10:36:29 AM
Pardon me, but you were the one who said this:

Quote
anyway that post is getting on for being nearly a year old so something could have changed or has no development happened on RockBox for nearly a year   ::)

The implication that if the one feature that you are interested in has not changed then this means that no development has taken place at all seems a bit like trolling to me.  The "eye roll" only accentuates this perception.  Honestly, it would be easy for the people who have worked hard on Rockbox during this time to take offense about that.  However, my comment was not intended to be overly harsh.  I only wanted to draw your attention to the fact that whether or not this feature has changed and whether or not Rockbox has undergone development are two distinct things.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: nc8000 on February 20, 2009, 02:07:59 PM
Well I come here as a new user asking a question that is of interest and all I basically get told is that I'm an idiot for not finding the answer myself. I did not expect anybody to start resarching documentation for me but hoped that perhaps somebody who actually knew the answer (which it does not seem that either of you two do) would read the question and come with a polite answer.

Also I'm not in posesion of measuring equipment that would let me measure what the specs of the signal coming out of the optical output on an iRiver is (and I expect not many have that) and neither do I have a SACD player or any other device that delivers anything better than CD quality so I don't know what to expect and therefore cant compare the sound as I also dont have those specific recordings in ordinary cd version.

I have now poked around a bit more and read the spec sheat for the Phillips ADC/DAC chip that is in the H1XX units and it seems to be able to handle 24/96 (but not 24/192) so it actually seems that it would be a usefull thing at least in these units.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: saratoga on February 20, 2009, 02:40:27 PM
I did not expect anybody to start resarching documentation for me but hoped that perhaps somebody who actually knew the answer (which it does not seem that either of you two do) would read the question and come with a polite answer.

Getting angry when people don't know things you also do not know seems like a reasonable thing to do.

Also I'm not in posesion of measuring equipment that would let me measure what the specs of the signal coming out of the optical output on an iRiver is (and I expect not many have that) and neither do I have a SACD player or any other device that delivers anything better than CD quality so I don't know what to expect and therefore cant compare the sound as I also dont have those specific recordings in ordinary cd version.

Yes, that was his point.  If you can't tell the difference (which apparently you cannot), then it doesn't matter.  Unless I'm missing something, you just answered your own question?
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: nc8000 on February 20, 2009, 03:02:30 PM
I did not expect anybody to start resarching documentation for me but hoped that perhaps somebody who actually knew the answer (which it does not seem that either of you two do) would read the question and come with a polite answer.

Getting angry when people don't know things you also do not know seems like a reasonable thing to do.


Not following you on that one. Why do people who also don't know the answer have to tell me I'm an idiot for asking instead of just finding out for my self, they could just keep quiet ???


Also I'm not in posesion of measuring equipment that would let me measure what the specs of the signal coming out of the optical output on an iRiver is (and I expect not many have that) and neither do I have a SACD player or any other device that delivers anything better than CD quality so I don't know what to expect and therefore cant compare the sound as I also dont have those specific recordings in ordinary cd version.

Yes, that was his point.  If you can't tell the difference (which apparently you cannot), then it doesn't matter.  Unless I'm missing something, you just answered your own question?


I never said that I couldn't tell the difference, I don't know if I can tell the difference as I have never heard a hires signal before and am not in possion of a device that could play me such a signal, that is why I was interested in whether the RockBoxed iRiver COULD deliver such a signal so I could find out for myself. Say I play the same tune as a 16/44 file and a 24/192 file and don't hear a difference, does that mean that I can't hear the difference or that the unit cant play the full resolution of the 24/192 file and therefore are playing both as 16/44 ?
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Chronon on February 20, 2009, 03:08:00 PM
Honestly, you would do yourself a big favor to find a way to run an ABX test properly since even moderate bitrate lossy files are transparent for many people.  I have not been able to find evidence of people who can reliably distinguish 24/96 audio from 16/44 but have found accounts of studies that unanimously show the converse -- indistinguishability. 

Edit: Pointing out that you can answer this for yourself is good advice.  And I don't see where Llorean ever called you an idiot.  He just pointed out that you could probably answer this for yourselves much faster by testing than waiting around for an answer.  Many computers have a digital input these days.  This would give you a way to characterize the data stream coming from the digital line out.  I also have a digital TOSlink input on my stereo receiver that accepts 24/192.  Of course, we don't know what equipment you have, but I still think it's good general advice to point out that you can probably find a way to test this yourself.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: nc8000 on February 20, 2009, 03:17:34 PM
Honestly, you would do yourself a big favor to find a way to run an ABX test properly since even moderate bitrate lossy files are transparent for many people.  I have not been able to find evidence of people who can reliably distinguish 24/96 audio from 16/44 but have found accounts of studies that unanimously show the converse -- indistinguishability. 

Now that is a sound comment, the problem is that I'm not going to go buy a SACD player just to test if I can hear the difference which is why it would be fantastic if the RockBoxed H-140 COULD play these files to full resolution. Up until getting a used H-140 all my ripped music was in 320KB aac. From the lineout of my unit into my main home rig I would say that I in an ABX test can spot the full 16/44 uncompressed file 8 out of 10 times a bit depending on the kind of music. Doing the same test from the headphone out of my unit in everyday transport situations I would agree that I can't detect the difference reliably.

Don't get me wrong, I think the RockBox project is an absolutely fantastic achievement and I'm full of respect for the work loads of people have put into it but I did not feel that my entry into this world was greated with any level of respect or helpfulness, just scorn and flippant remarks for being such an idiot that cant find out anything for himself.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: dreamlayers on February 20, 2009, 04:12:11 PM
SACD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD) isn't even PCM; it's DSD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Stream_Digital). Essentially that is 1 bit at 2.8224 MHz.  Also there's no convenient way to rip a SACD.  If you somehow managed to get the DSD data, you'd have to convert it to PCM.  DVD-Audio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_Audio) supports up to 24/192 losslessly compressed PCM and it can be ripped.

What does being able to tell the difference between uncompressed 16/44 and 320 kb/s AAC have to do with this?
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Llorean on February 20, 2009, 06:04:06 PM
Again, I'm sorry you read those as scorn and flippant remarks. Try reading them without imagining intonation and you'll see they're simply suggestions I made.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: nc8000 on February 21, 2009, 04:27:28 AM
I give up.

Some admin please delete my user and posts and forget you ever heard about me and you all go back into your smug little selfasured world where outside idiots really aren't wanted.

Over and OUT, OUT, OUT ...
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Chronon on February 22, 2009, 03:51:51 PM
 ???

If you feel the need to leave then you are free to do so.  You can easily delete your own account if you like. 
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: saratoga on February 22, 2009, 06:50:14 PM
I give up.

Some admin please delete my user and posts and forget you ever heard about me and you all go back into your smug little selfasured world where outside idiots really aren't wanted.

Over and OUT, OUT, OUT ...

You've said this before and then come back anyway, so its probably better we just leave your account alone in case you decide to come back and throw yet another fit.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: rmaniac on March 24, 2009, 07:44:20 PM
Might we consider some work on this for the summer of code?

Rockbox plays back files of higher bit depth and higher sample rates than 16 bits and 44100 Hz just fine right now, but not with full quality. Here is what happens:
  • Bit depth: Rockbox will decode all formats to as high a bit depth as possible for both lossy and lossless formats. All internal processing is also done at 32 bits bit depth. However, all current targets truncate to 16 bits at the output. This can be fixed if someone cares enough about it to do some programming, but the DACs in current targets really aren't good enough for this to make much sense.
  • Sample rate: Rockbox will decode higher sample rate files (like 96 kHz) just fine, but resamples to 44100 at the output, so some quality is lost (especially considering the extremely crappy resampler we use). Again, someone needs to care enough to do some programming to fix this, and it makes more sense to fix this problem than the bit depth problem.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Llorean on March 24, 2009, 07:47:02 PM
I don't necessarily think it's really a GSoC scale project. At the very least, there are already several proposals that have a wider impact than this one would.
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: rmaniac on March 24, 2009, 11:26:39 PM
I just think it would be nicer than things like.. scummvm. As much as I love it I just don't think it would be the most useful thing on rockbox. :)
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: Llorean on March 24, 2009, 11:33:23 PM
"Nicer" doesn't necessarily factor into it as much as "is it an appropriate amount of work being proposed by someone capable of doing said amount of work."

All proposals that answer yes to *that* question then basically get sorted on "niceness" or "how much we want"-ness or "how confident we are they'll finish"
Title: Re: 24/96 (HIRES files for playback...)
Post by: saratoga on March 24, 2009, 11:39:54 PM
Adding support for higher sample rates isn't really appropriate since its a fairly simple by the standards of GSOC projects.