we're talking about the (if) audible effects of brick wall filtering that occurs with a 44.1k sample rate.....no?
I'm just looking at the obvious problems the lower the sample rate is....they still exist at 44.1 even though we're not supposed to hear them.....right?
One thing i remember from my university days is that what you are sampling needs to have NO signal above 1/2 the Nyquist.
That rule is broken all the time. Hence, i expect, why it is being explored.
dave
That's not the case Bob. Most recording is done at 48k / 24 bit, then 96k
and less again use 192k.
TCD
Richard, WRT your power amp, did you get to the bottom of that oscillation
problem? Was it in fact an oscillation issue?
TCD
Yes looks as though I may have been misled in a couple articles I read about 192 recording,
Some Dvd uses 96 or 192 .
many recording studios look like they’re going 24/96 with 192 used in some.
So yah Terry.....not yet!
Sorry......shouldn’t post while I’m working, fact check goes to the wayside! 😛
Some Dvd uses 96 or 192 .
many recording studios look like they’re going 24/96 with 192 used in some.
So yah Terry.....not yet!
Sorry......shouldn’t post while I’m working, fact check goes to the wayside! 😛
Yes - this happens at the recording (A/D) and can not be cured later - it will always be there, impregnated in that recording forever.
//
George,
I do remember you mentioning your mother's (grandmother?) problems. Normally my understanding is they are not hereditary! I get that from a cousin who is a specialist in such issues. His mother had very serious problems.
I also recall you have cut back on alcohol consumption, another factor.
So perhaps your medical care is doing good for you. But just in case be kind to the wife and nearby children. (Seems to be in your character as shown here.)
My best to you.
No oscillation problem at all. That was some one else bright assumption. It was a non-tracking bias situation.
THx-Richard
So, what is it you are saying, what FS is used by most digital recording? Kindly enlighten us.
I dont know why anyone, at this point in time, is still defending CD 16/44 as plenty accurate. It is pretty much indefensible to people who listen. All have moved on and for the better. Sound has greatly improved because of it. Thank the Gods.
How can we make a dynamic loudspeaker a more accurate reproducer? Lower its gross amounts of distortion?
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited: