seanadams;130863 Wrote: > Now, what's stupid is taking 44.1 CD rips, resampling them to 96KHz and > then re-saving to disk, thinking you've "given it more breathing room" > or "opened up the high end" or whatever. It's total nonsense, exactly > like on CSI where they zoom in on a single pixel, click "ENHANCE" and > then read a license plate from a mile away. It don't work that way.
Of course, that would be stupid, because it wastes memory. However, there are sound reasons to do this on the fly. Namely, upsampling shifts aliasing artifacts (so-called ghost images) to a much higher (inaudible) frequency range. As you alluded, upsampling does not add a single bit of new data, but it can allow a designer to modify post-DAC filtering (hopefully, for the better). -- ezkcdude SB3->Derek Shek TDA1543/CS8412 NOS DAC->MIT Terminator 2 interconnects->Endler Audio 24-step Attenuators (RCA-direct)->Parasound Halo A23 125W/ch amplifier->Speltz anti-cables->DIY 2-ways + Dayton Titanic 10" subwoofer He's not hi-fi, he's my stereo. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ezkcdude's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2545 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=26685 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
