Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: 192kHz

On Thursday 26 January 2006 14:23, Carlo Capocasa wrote:
>> I've always thought that a soundcard whose clock is able to work at
>> 192KHz will be more precise than a soundcard whose clock is sticked
>> to 48KHz, so there's a reason to buy a 192KHz soundcard... and work
>> at 48KHz. :)
>
>Ah, kind of like buying a big fat stereo even though you live in an
>apartment building :) so you can get the precision listening at 10%
> volume.
>
>> I don't see any reason to work at 192KHz. Apart from huge files,
>> Nyquist is on my side.
>
>Err, NyQuil? Oh Nyquist ;) Took a little google to get that one about
>the frequencies we are consiously aware of. Hm, I audiophiles probably
>don't qualify as 'practical purposes' but I do here a whole lot of
>bickering by them about the dynamics of CDs. I wonder if it is possile
>for a well-trained sense of hearing to 'sense' frequencies beyond
> human nyquist and get a psychoacoustic sensation from them anyway.
>
>Thanks a lot for sharing, Ismael!
>
It doesn't take well trained ears, Carlo. I'm 71, with "Carhart
Notches" over 100 db deep in my hearing, mostly from wearing out 3
rifle barrels at the target range before I discovered ear-muffs.

But, I can feel uncomfortable, even pain yet, instantly, from the
effects of the old acoustic doppler motion detector type burglar alarms
that run at about 44 kilohertz when I enter a building equipt with such
alarms. I don't make it a habit to stick around and discuss the
weather with the occupants when I encounter them things.
>Carlo

-- 
Cheers, Gene
People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word
'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasses vz's
stupid bounce rules.  I do use spamassassin too. :-)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.