Timothy Miller wrote:
Sorry to tell you but using 16 bit 44,1KHz sampling most person can tell the difference you are already at twice the nyquist frequency for what the ear can listen. It's a base line of sort. To give you an idea cellphone are using a 8bit 8Khz sampling rate, it's suffisant for voice. 16 bit 96Khz more than 4 time the maximum earing frequency the high frequency start to be more defined. Finally high-end audio at 24-bit and 192Khz, the 24 bit allow you to listen to noise in signal and record it(aproximatly 0,6nV for a signal 1V p-p). 192Khz your at a factor 10 of the earing range, multiple point for each sine wave even for 20Khz that only young kid can ear and not all of them. More than anyone could really detect. If someone tell you he can see a difference at that resolution it's more in is head than anything. Going to 32 bit would more be a waste of bit and would increase the cost of the codec for pratically no return.On 4/3/06, Justin Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For a card in recording studio 24-bit 192KHz is more than enough. Also for that range there already program who exist. So no need to write or push a new aplication for only one card. My two cents |
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
