[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
86.120.170.131
In Reply to: RE: Yes I can hear the difference posted by BKWells on January 06, 2008 at 07:28:56
Nyquist Sampling Theory states that "a sampled waveform contains ALL the information without any distortions, when the sampling rate exceeds twice the highest frequency contained by the sampled waveform." (quote from Lavry's Sampling Theory paper which is available on his site).So if the waveform contains frequencies of say up to 45kHz you would need at least a 90kHz sampling rate in order to track the waveform without any distortions. But since 90 kHz would be the theoretical limit 96 kHz would be ok to give you a secure margin. Going with a sampling rate of 192 kHz won't reproduce more precisely the original waveform because all the info in the waveform was already perfectly sampled by the 96 kHz sampling rate. Not only that, but going with higher sampling rates then needed Lavry says reduces the accuracy with which the signal can be processed. He says that "when it comes to electronics signals (both analog and digital), there is a trade off between speed (in this case sample rate and bandwidth) and accuracy (how accurately we can process the signal)... Less accuracy means more distortions and noise. So where do we set the sample rate? In theory, at twice the bandwidth we can hear (Nyquist theorem). In practice, we need some reasonable practical margin - that should be left up to the designer. Note that if you believe that we hear say 25KHz, sampling at 192KH means you are taking 300% margin. It is a huge waste of accuracy, disk space".
If we agree with all that then the 24/96 track could sound better then the 24/192 track because it contains ALL the information that the 24/192 track does + it will be processed more accurately due to the lower sampling rate.
This is the reason I mentioned the mic used to make the recording and if it would have been able to send frequencies past 48 kHz (the limit of 96 kHz sampling rate). If it wasn't able to send to the A/D converter frequencies beyond let's say 45 kHz (48 kHz being the theoretical limit) then using a 192 kHz sampling rate won't gain you anything, of contrary, going with higher sample rate makes you loose in the accuracy with which the signal is processed.
Edits: 01/06/08Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]