Bob wrote:
Well, at least *some* of the chips out there do
not make it to 96 KHz when sampling at 192 KHz. Its
been a few years since I dug into them. Back
then a chip that had an internal filter that went to 96K
was very much the exception rather than the
rule. If the only point of 192K is getting to a 96K bandwidth,
a lot of the chip guys missed out on it
.
192k *audio* ADCs often have input anti-aliasing
filters that are only 20-50kHz wide. In that
case, the point of sampling at 192ks/S is so the
anti-aliasing filter does not need to have a
brick wall response (as it would need to have if
you sampled at 48 or even 96ks/S), so it can have
a flatter group delay over the range of human hearing.
For this and a number of other good reasons
(large variations in gain, large DC errors, and
idle tones, to name just three), one does not
generally want to use audio ADCs (or DACs) for
non-audio applications even if there is not an
internal input filter -- tempting as it may seem
because they make bazillions of the audio parts
and they are cheap. That's what they make "industrial" ADCs and DACs for.
Best regards,
Charles
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
