Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] RFC: API for audio across network - inter-host audio routing
From: Paul Davis (pbd_AT_op.net)
Date: Mon Jun 17 2002 - 14:07:48 EEST
>Actually you are quite wrong about 192 kHz being a hype. Granted if you
>are going back down to 44.1 you are not getting much of a benefit. But if
>you are say creating music for SACD or DVDA formats, it is
>essential. There are three problems caused by lower bit rates; greater
>clock jitter distortion, non-linearities in the D/A, especially in
>Delta-Sigma single bit converters, and the number of sample points of say
>a 20khz audio signal. At 40Khz sampling that would give you 2 points on
>the wave to reconstruct it. What if you're sampling intervals are 180 out
>of phase with that signal? You would lose it completey. There are also
>all sort of phase distortion problems at higher frequencies for the same
>reason.
the point is that most people believe 20kHz to be beyond the hearing
range of the vast majority of human beings, and hence whether its lost
or not is beside the point.
i can see the reason to move the 96kHz, even though i've never done a
double blind test, but 192 seems to like absolutely nothing but a plan
to try to obsolete more equipment and/or create market segments to
keep sales up by nudging people into upgrades.
forcing 8 times the CPU load and storing 8 times the data for no
eventual increase in audible quality for 95%+ of the population? disk
space might be cheap and CPU power might be increasing, but i'll pass,
thanks very much.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Jun 17 2002 - 14:14:53 EEST