Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] sampling at high frequencies
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Jan 26 2004 - 11:40:03 EET
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 10:19:59 +0100, Joern Nettingsmeier wrote:
> imnsho, all this sampling rate hype is a clever industry ploy to keep
> people from thinking that their hardware is finally good enough and they
> can stop buying now.
Probably true but...
> people can't hear over 20k. period. 48k sampling rate gives you 24k
> minus what's cropped off by the aliasing filter. granted, higher
> sampling allows you to use a simpler, less steep aliasing filter, and
> some people claim to perceive an improvement from that. but even then,
> 96k should be enough.
This is not quite correct. While humans can not hear continuous tones over
20-odd kHz that is not the whole story, the frequency reproduction also
limits the minimum transient rise time, which is detected by a different
part of the ear (IIRC, IANABiologist and my psychoacoustics textbook is at
work).
I dont know wether I, personally can tell the difference between a 48 and
96 recording, but I'm not going to rule it out.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Jan 26 2004 - 11:41:53 EET