Phil Leigh wrote: > what "intersample effects"? Do you think there is information > (different sample values) missing. There isn't. If there were, the > Shannon et al are completely wrong.
Agreed, @teros is tilting at windmills. More precisely, there is nothing "intersample" in proper sampling, that is what Nyquist and Shannon are all about. This is not some recent untested theory, we have been using Shannon's work for 60+ years in real engineering. Successful real engineering. This is not to argue that 44.1kHz is the perfect sample rate. But if you think it needs to be higher, then you have to argue that there is useful information above 22kHz. I believe, without justification, that there may be something between 20kHz and 40kHz, not much, but there may be something. But that just justifies a 88.2 or 96kHz sample rate. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
