Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Sample Rates / Sample Sizes
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Sun Jun 20 2004 - 00:30:37 EEST
On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 04:30:26 -0400, Chris Pickett wrote:
> At first glance that seems fairly honest. It does also suggest that you
> wouldn't appreciate the benefits with a normal audio CD, so in that
> respect it seems pointless, but maybe I'm missing something. As for the
> Nyquist frequency I read some discussion that some people can hear up to
> 23 kHz, and that there may even be psychoacoustic effects up to 30 kHz,
> but I didn't try to find any references on this.
I vaguely remember being shown a paper where a group of people were played
sine and saw waves at 15+ kHz and they could tell them apart. If I
rembered it correctly that does mean that humans can detect the presence
of partials at 30ish kHz, but my memory of it is vague.
> As noted, the effect processing argument says that it's better to
> process everything internally at as high a resolution as possible (bit-
> and frequency-wise); does this by itself mean we should also record
> everything as high as possible, to get the best input to the effect
> functions? I have no idea.
Internally many processes upsample, process and then downsample.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Jun 20 2004 - 00:23:05 EEST