Re: [LAD] 88 or 96?

======= On Monday 04 June 2007, Lars Luthman wrote: =======
...
> It may be cheaper to downsample from 88.2 kHz - just use a brickwall
> filter and then throw away every odd sample. I don't think that's reason
> enough for using it though, downsampling is presumably a one-time job
> that isn't all that urgent.
>
>
> --ll
>

======= On Monday 04 June 2007, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: =======
...
> If you are using the secret rabbit code SINC based (or any other
> "correct" resampler) to do the resampling, then the only advantage
> of 88k2 is that it uses slight less disk space.
>
> When using crappy resamplers (ie linear resamplers, including the
> one in secret rabbit code), they may be slightly less bad at doing
> 88k2 -> 44k1 than 96k -> 44k1.
>
> HTH,
> Erik

Lars, Erik, thanks!

I concluded, I can use 96K, SRC and forget about the issue.

Andrew
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev
Received on Mon Jun 4 12:15:06 2007