On 29 Jan 2013 17:43:48 GMT, Rob <[email protected]> wrote: >What I still don't understand is why you cannot just use the local >clock to do the calibration. Are you claiming that the devices that >have the 22150 sample rate also have a local clock that is running >fast by the same amount? I would not expect that. It would mean >the clock would run fast by 6.5 minutes/day, something that some user >would certainly notice and rightfully complain about.
The local clock could indeed be used to detect the gross deviation of 4000 ppm. But that is only the extreme case. There are other cases where the deviation is smaller, but still large enough to need correction. They are probably where the OEM really intended to produce 22,050 audio samples per second, but for whatever reason the result was more than 12 ppm off. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
