On 8/7/15 1:40 AM, Hal Murray wrote:
[email protected] said:
Well, at least *some* of the chips out there do not make it to 96 KHz when
sampling at 192 KHz. It’s 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 ….
Where did 192 KHz come from? Why is anybody interested in anything that far
over 2*44 KHz?
There's lots of high resolution parts at that rate..
And if it's that fast, odds are the built in sample/track/hold is good
enough that you could directly sample the 60kHz without much trouble.
With a slower ADC and a good analog BPF and a good sample/hold, you
could sample at a few kHz, but that shifts the design burden to the BPF
and the sample/hold.
It's common to have an audio ADC run much faster than Nyquist, but that's a
hack to make it easier to build the cut off filter. You build a simple
analog filter and a sharp digital filter and decimator so the output is 2x
the target frequency. You get what you want without a fancy analog filter.
_______________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
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.
