On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 09:36:31AM +0300, Juuso Alasuutari wrote: > Why did you resample to 48 kHz instead of 96 kHz?
Three reasons: - It's a very common case. - It's a considerably more difficult one than upsampling to 96 kHz. If you work out where the first aliased image ends up, then for 44->48 most of it is in the audible range, while for 44->96 all of it ends up above 22 kHz. - My web space is limited, and 96 kHz would double the files sizes ! > I'd imagine the differences would show up better that way, Considering the second point above, it's quite the inverse. Ciao, -- FA Follie! Follie! Delirio vano รจ questo ! _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev
