On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 04:33:13PM +0200, Florian Schmidt wrote:
> > This seems like a sensible idea, but one could wonder why in that case
> > the sample frequency needs to be 96 kHz (*).
>
> Well, the argument i often heard and which IMHO does make sense is that
> when heavy processing is used the higher samplerate keeps many artefacts
> out of the audible range for a longer time than with 48khz for example.
Yes, the desire to keep some algorithms simple is one good reason to use
96 kHz. I do it as well in Aeolus, where parts of some of the wavetables are
computed at 2, 3 or 4 the output sample rate, to allow linear interpolation
at run time.
-- FAReceived on Thu Jul 7 16:15:38 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jul 07 2005 - 16:15:38 EEST