Poll - how important IS 96 freq. in 24 bit system?

[Cazzbar]

and in the previous paragraph?

 

[Ford Van]

and in the previous paragraph?

Picky, picky, picky!

 

[Cazzbar]

only a bit

 

[sonnylarsen]

First I'd like to mention that the big difference you hear in DVD-Audio is largely due to the 24 bit resolution, not the 96khz sample rate. I am not convinced that higher sample rates will get you anything other than SLIGHTLY smoother high frequencies.

Someone please explain how a microphone with a 20hz - 22khz frequency response is going to pick up these harmonic frequencies people are talking about.

 

[Ford Van]

Someone please explain how a microphone with a 20hz - 22khz frequency response is going to pick up these harmonic frequencies people are talking about.

If you notice, they usually only show those ratings for the "flat" or if you will "non-phase shifted" frequency response. A microphone can, and will pick up frequencies higher and lower than shown in those graphs, but those frequencies will have significant amounts of phase shift!

 

[NL5]

I am sorry, but you have absolutely NO idea how sample rate conversion is done, and that is obvious from this post!

You can talk to all the professionals (who also seem to misunderstand how it is done too!) you want who agree with your totally wrong premise. That does not make your point any more valid.

When audio is sample rate converted, it is totally re-sampled at the new sample rate. The new samples are based upon algorithms that predicts how the original audio will make a wave form that can be re-sampled by an algorithm that predicts the new wave form of the audio.

The only "efficiency" that you might gain is that there are less samples to process at 88.2, but in NO WAY OR FORM is the process any more "simple" because the original sample rate is some number dividable by the target sample rate.

Actually, the source quality rule comes into effect, and quite the opposite is true! By having more samples available for re-sampling, and better re-sample is possible!

The biggest deciding factor on a sample rate conversion is the quality of the algorithm that is used, and the original quality of the file. If you can argue that 96khz potentially SOUNDS better than 88.2, then you can successfully argue that a SRC from 96 to 44.1 will sound better than a 88.2 to 44.1 will!

If you just think of it like this, it makes a lot more sense: The sample rate conversion is only as good as the source quality.

Get it now?

Great post!

It amazes me how this gets spread around the interweb like it was fact.

"It just throws out every other sample" - If I had a dollar for every time that was posted.......

 

[eyeteeth]

Uh... yea... rate... depth... big... bit... typed quick and was worried about whether or not it made sense...

But... yea. Good catch.