You're right; I was being imprecise (or sloppy, perhaps). Graphical aliasing isn't the same as signal aliasing, though it's easy to equate the two conceptually

You're right; I was being imprecise (or sloppy, perhaps). Graphical aliasing isn't the same as signal aliasing, though it's easy to equate the two conceptually. I understand the value of using 96KHz instead of 48KHz so you can have a gentler filter, at least in the days before digital filters (as you say), but don't you agree that there's no further advantage to 192KHz in that respect? Maybe I'm justifying 192KHz by saying that it's for cleaner processing, when the real reason is It's A Bigger Number. I've never heard anyone use "resolution" to mean bit depth; in fact, I've always heard it used to specifically mean sample rate - e.g. 96KHz resolution, 24 bits. But I've never studied DSP programming - I have a plumber's understanding, not a fluid mechanics engineer's.