Re: [linux-audio-dev] Sample Rate / Resolution question

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Sample Rate / Resolution question
From: Richard C. Burnett (burnett_AT_tality.com)
Date: Fri Mar 01 2002 - 00:18:28 EET


That is what I thought too, that 88.2 would be a better frequency. But,
as you say, I am not convinced either. I guess I need to perform a test
on it and see. Record a sound at 96, do a bunch of processing, mixing a
few signals and then convert it to 44.1, then do the same test with
everything at 44.1 to begin with. I mean I do believe that 96 will sound
better while you are working on it, because the data has more points for
the smoothing interpolation back to analog, but if you are going to
downsample at the end, its not going to do the end product any favors :)

> This is true, but it does matter for another reason: resampling to a non-integral
> ratio requires more sophisticated interpolation and is less likely to be accurate.
> So for work targeted to CD, 88.2 would be a better sampling rate, assuming
> you believe it's any better than 44.1. I haven't yet convinced myself it's necessary.
> and it's a convenient excuse for the industry to sell us more expensive gear...

Unless you are playing live :) Then I think it would sound better.

>
> --PW
>

+------------------------+-----------------------+
| T a l i t y | +------+ |
+------------------------+ +----+-+ | |
| Richard Burnett | +-+ | |
| Senior Design Engineer +---+ +----+ |
| burnett_AT_tality.com | | |
| | | |
| Phone: 919.380.3014 | |
| Fax: 919.380.3903 | | |
+------------------------------------------------+


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 00:09:33 EET