jt25741;231080 Wrote: > Indeed. Nyquist says that any frequency above 2X the sampling frequency > is garbage, and must be thrown out(filtered). It doesn't say that > sampling frequencies that are higher do not approximate the analog > waveform more precisely! This is a common misunderstanding. Just > because 44.1Khz will provide a valid approximate data point from > sampling a 20Khz signal -- it will yield approximately 2 samples here. > Anything less -- well is not correlated. Again, 2 samples are just > barely enough where you will not have noise and produces a very crude > curve at that ;) Not as nice as as say -- 4 at 10Khz, 8 at 5Khz -- or > 50 or so at 800Hz -- all from Redbook. > > The bottom line is, higher sampling rates "can" sound better and > "should" be better -- particularly at the higher encoded > frequencies(cymbals etc.) The fact that they often don't sound any > better can be because of numerous reasons -- many of which have already > been suggested.
You're very confused about this. It's not a "common misunderstanding". Just ask yourself what the difference is between a 20 kHz square wave and a perfectly smooth 20 kHz sine wave. Answer - a 60 kHz sine wave (plus higher frequencies). So if you can hear 60 kHz, you'll know the difference. -- opaqueice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38596 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
