Support for Extended Sample Frequency (?)

Apologies in advance for this lengthy post.
TL/DR: 96 kHz would be awesome, please and thank you… ԅ[ •́ ﹏ •̀ ]و

I’m curious about higher sampling frequencies, especially 96 kHz (at 24 bit depth, obvs). I think Brad mentioned the possibility of additional/variable sample rate and bit depth in an interview, though he did not elaborate much further and made no mention of higher resolution, specifically.

I’m an advocate for higher sample rates in general, mainly for the benefit of preserving the sound of very clean vinyl to the extent that is possible, though I’m also cautious not to proclaim myself an audiophile. The MPC 4000 supported up to 96 kHz – in 2002, I might add.

It baffles me why 18 years on, modern hardware samplers, even flagship ones, have persistently top out at 44.1 kHz…as far as I can tell, no other production model hardware sampler has supported higher sample rates until the S2400. I did my homework, but couldn’t find any examples. Someone who’s a serious sampler connoisseur, please correct my ignorance if need be.

(96k is supported by Akai and NI when running their respective software natively, which is cool.)

So I’m wondering, why has no manufacturer apart from Isla supported sample frequencies higher than 44.1k since the MPC 4000? There’s probably no single answer. My knowledge of the demands on DSP resources and processing power of modern chipsets in regards to so-called high resolution audio is lacking, so if anyone has any insight on this topic, please elucidate us.

The attention paid to sound quality, analog circuitry, and the 48 kHz sample rate are all major considerations that went into my decision to preorder the S2400. It seems a firmware update supporting 96k could be in the cards, but I wonder if that is beyond the hypothetical limit of the S2400 processor.

I think this feature may be well suited to the intention of the product design and help set it apart in the marketplace. That said, there are probably many good reasons the engineers chose 48 kHz as the sample frequency, and certainly I don’t understand all the factors that go into the trade off between DSP power and processing audio at higher resolution.

Anyone else out there interested in this?

To Brad:
I include this post in the Feature Request thread because I would like to see up to 24 bit 96 kHz support one day, since you hinted at there being a good amount of headroom available to the DSP. However, I understand computational resources are not infinite and appreciate that there may be other potential features which prioritize function and audio manipulation at current sample rates over any perceived improvement in sound quality.

I also completely respect the design decision as-is, going into production, and don’t wish to place any further demands before the thing is even released. Just wanted to add my thoughts on this topic. Many thanks to you and your team for all the hard work. Your efforts are greatly appreciated.


I totally hear you on the topping out after the mpc4k/z4/z8 - I got the mv and thought for sure it did but it doesn’t. What’s funny is my 12-bit TX and EIGHT BIT Mirage do over 44.1 (I just got the cart for the mirage which allows 50khz(!) but I think I’ll get 1.6secs ha. I’d like high rez too but we’ll see what happens, it’s cool no matter what but yea that’d be cool for sure, a special reduced function mode and 192 ooooo ha, who knows but sample rates are cool to me.


Hi ESPI, thanks for your reply!

yeah, guess I wasn’t thinking about keyboard/workstations or rack mount samplers like the Zx series. I’m no expert on hardware samplers specifically, having only used Maschine for the last 10 years (MK1/ current v2.10 software). Also own a Korg KP3 and Akai Headrush looper pedal, but I wouldn’t really count those.

as far as a sampling drum machine is concerned, I concede the higher sample frequency argument is largely academic. nice to have the option for 96 or 192k when you feel it is warranted, but I would rather the ADC/DAC in combination with other input/output components on an instrument sound good than simply have high specs. and it seems that is paramount with the S2400.

I just wish that the competition in the market for hardware samplers had pushed the standard resolution higher in the last 2 decades, as it has with audio interfaces and other recording equipment. so cheers to Isla for challenging the current convention among their competition!