On Sep 25, 2015, at 09:56 31, David Klann <[email protected]> wrote:

> Which brings up the point from Aaron's original point claiming to need
> to encode the audio at 192KHz. Aaron, why is it that you think you
> need this high of a sample rate? 48KHz is better than CD quality which
> has always been better than FM quality. Are you confusing sample rate
> with compression bit-rate?

AFAICT, he’s wanting to use StereoTool to generate MPX composite, which does 
require 192 ksample/sec because of the ultrasonic spectral components involved 
(up to around 48 kHz baseband, more if the RDS encoder feature is also used).

Those who have been around here for awhile may remember Dan Mills, who was one 
of (might have even been *the* first) original developers of this concept.  
IIRC, his setup involved two sound cards, each bound to a separate instance of 
JACK (one operating at 48 ksamples/sec for Rivendell, and another at 192 
ksample/sec for the MPX generation), along with appropriate sample clock 
interconnection to keep both cards operating in sync.  His processor talked to 
*both* JACK graphs.  The trick as I recall was getting the two cards to clock 
at a precise 4:1 ratio.  Not a trivial setup.  I suppose you could do something 
similar, using JACK’s ‘dummy’ backend for the Rivendell graph, but the devil 
will be in getting the clocks to sync.

Cheers!


|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. |              Chief Developer             |
|                           |              Paravel Systems             |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|          A room without books is like a body without a soul.         |
|                                         -- Cicero                    |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|


_______________________________________________
Rivendell-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://caspian.paravelsystems.com/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev

Reply via email to