Mains Cables R Us. Temple Audio  Cranage Hifi Show
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 45
  1. #1
    Wammer tones's Avatar
    Join Date
     Apr 2006
    Posts
     2,955
    Location
     Baselland, CH
    Real Name
     Tony
    Turn Table
     Linn LP12/Armageddon
    T/Arm & Cart
     Ekos/Klyde
    SUT/Phono
     Creek
    Digital Source 1
     Meridian 588
    Digital Source 2
     Sony Universal
    Speakers
     Quad ESL-57, LS3/5a
    Pre Amp
     EAR834, Quad 44
    Power Amp
     Quad II, Quad 606
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    'Allo, 'allo, 'allo, wot's all this then? I have a few days off (as opposed to the usual few off-days) and a new bit springs up like a weed. Good luck to it.

    As something worthy of technical note, I am proposing a link to good ol' (or bad ol') HFC:

    http://forum.hifichoice.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=24946

    which I hope James will allow, because, later in the discussion of vinyl enters the HFC resident technical whiz adb (qualified in electronics). The bit of interest is p.5, where he does a great exposition on sampling rates and why people's intuitive ideas on the subject are completely up the creek. It's not a complete explanation, but it's the best we'll get without resorting to the mathematics (in which I for one would be lost by the first few lines).
    The man with the golden ear trumpet

  2. #2
    Wannabe dealer i_should_coco's Avatar
    Join Date
     Sep 2006
    Posts
     19,931
    Real Name
     Coco-san
    Turn Table
     Voyd Reference
    T/Arm & Cart
     AN Arm-3/Io Ltd.
    SUT/Phono
     AN S9/DIY LCR
    Digital Source 1
     Laptop/JRiver
    DAC
     Nadja
    Speakers
     YL Acoustic active
    Pre Amp
     Nadja DSP
    Power Amp
     Lots
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    tones wrote:
    'Allo, 'allo, 'allo, wot's all this then? I have a few days off (as opposed to the usual few off-days) and a new bit springs up like a weed. Good luck to it.

    As something worthy of technical note, I am proposing a link to good ol' (or bad ol') HFC:

    http://forum.hifichoice.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=24946

    which I hope James will allow, because, later in the discussion of vinyl enters the HFC resident technical whiz adb (qualified in electronics). The bit of interest is p.5, where he does a great exposition on sampling rates and why people's intuitive ideas on the subject are completely up the creek. It's not a complete explanation, but it's the best we'll get without resorting to the mathematics (in which I for one would be lost by the first few lines).
    Funnily enough, I was reading that yesterday.

    I think the difficulty comes when you try and bring this to the real world and design and build a practical implementation. This is where the shortcomings of digtal come in.

    One thing he doesn't cover which I think is extremely important is hoe to preserve linearity at low levels and minimise quantisation errors of low level signals.


    CD players - computer audio for dummies.

  3. #3
    Wammer tones's Avatar
    Join Date
     Apr 2006
    Posts
     2,955
    Location
     Baselland, CH
    Real Name
     Tony
    Turn Table
     Linn LP12/Armageddon
    T/Arm & Cart
     Ekos/Klyde
    SUT/Phono
     Creek
    Digital Source 1
     Meridian 588
    Digital Source 2
     Sony Universal
    Speakers
     Quad ESL-57, LS3/5a
    Pre Amp
     EAR834, Quad 44
    Power Amp
     Quad II, Quad 606
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    As I understand it (and I readily admit that my knowledge of digital electronics amounts to spelling the words correctly (most of the time)), this is the real-world situation - this is what actually happens. Like adb, I believe that digital has no shortcomings in comparison with vinyl (neither of course will ever be - can ever be - perfect).

    As to linearity andquantisation levels, I don't know, but I suspectthe effect of these are much exaggerated (ditto "jitter"). I suspect that it's another case of the well-known audiophile disease of taking a known physical phenomenon and either exaggerating its significance out of all proportion or completely misattributing it.

    I have both vinyl and CD to a reasonably high quality (Meridian 588, Linn LP12/Ekos/Klyde) and I find it easy to hear the differences - the record has occasional surface noise and the CD doesn't. So, it's CD for me. Other folk (such as yourself obviously) think differently. Thats' fine. We only have our own ear/brain combinations to satisfy.
    The man with the golden ear trumpet

  4. #4
    Wannabe dealer i_should_coco's Avatar
    Join Date
     Sep 2006
    Posts
     19,931
    Real Name
     Coco-san
    Turn Table
     Voyd Reference
    T/Arm & Cart
     AN Arm-3/Io Ltd.
    SUT/Phono
     AN S9/DIY LCR
    Digital Source 1
     Laptop/JRiver
    DAC
     Nadja
    Speakers
     YL Acoustic active
    Pre Amp
     Nadja DSP
    Power Amp
     Lots
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    tones wrote:
    As I understand it (and I readily admit that my knowledge of digital electronics amounts to spelling the words correctly (most of the time)), this is the real-world situation - this is what actually happens. Like adb, I believe that digital has no shortcomings in comparison with vinyl (neither of course will ever be - can ever be - perfect).
    Yes, it is what actually happens and it's possibly to correctly re-construct all freqencies up to fs/2. When people say that you don't have enough points to follow the curve, they are mis-understanding. Any curvature is a sign of higher frequencies in the signal. As we are accepting band limiting, we can safely ignore this.


    As to linearity and quantisation levels, I don't know, but I suspect the effect of these are much exaggerated (ditto "jitter"). I suspect that it's another case of the well-known audiophile disease of taking a known physical phenomenon and either exaggerating its significance out of all proportion or completely misattributing it.
    Not at all exaggerated- in fact the linerarity of raw CD is only good at high levels. Only at 0dBFS levels do you have the full 65536 steps to quantise a waveform. At lower levels, quantisation errors become large. Unfortunately, quantisation noise is correlated to the signal and the evidence indicates that correlated noise is subjectively more audible and deleterious. However, this can be ameliorated almost totally with the addition of dither, which is carefully shaped noise and effectively turns the quantisation error signal into random un-correlated noise at the expense of dynamic range.

    Additional filters are required to remove aliasing images (Nyqusit theory says that these will appear at multiples of the sampling frequencies). In the case of CD, this requires an aggressive filter to sharply delineate the stop-band from the pass-band. These "brick wall" filters can cause frequency response aberrations (rippled response in HF) and/or time domain anomalies at HF, hence some people's preference for non-oversampling DACs without digital filters.

    Jitter is another issue, and due to clock errors when rebuilding the analogue signal. This has the effect of generating spurious signals, which may or may not be correlated to the audio.

    It seems we have learnt a lot about digital, especially in the last 5 years or so, and it is maturing as a technology, but I think there is still a lot to learn.

    As far as analogue goes, the ultimate resolution, I would hazard is actually higher than CD, and is basically limited by the size of the vinyl molecules (it can be calculated based on groove size, etc.). It is however still "quantised" after a fashion. The absolute dynamic range is limited by the noise floor, rather than resolution but this noise is truly random and therefore uncorrelated, making it subjectively less objectionable, though the dynamic range is significantly poorer than CD. Additionally, the bandwidth limiting is more graceful meaning fewer problems with filtering. Thus a less theoretically perfect system can sound very good indeed, because it has to do less processing and thus is easier to implement in practice.

    Interestingly, I was thinking about photography the other day and the luminance dynamic range of the best D-SLRs is about 10 stops, or 10-bits. Seems our ears might be better than our eyes. ;)

    I have both vinyl and CD to a reasonably high quality (Meridian 588, Linn LP12/Ekos/Klyde) and I find it easy to hear the differences - the record has occasional surface noise and the CD doesn't. So, it's CD for me. Other folk (such as yourself obviously) think differently. Thats' fine. We only have our own ear/brain combinations to satisfy.
    You're perfectly entitled to your own opinion, I don't have any problem with that! Currently, I prefer my vinyl setup - it has much more colour and better rendering of timbre. The CD player is no slouch, it's just that my vinyl seems to give a more natural rendering of the performance. This is of course a subjective opinion only.

    Just my 2p on the subject.

    Edit: typos.
    CD players - computer audio for dummies.

  5. #5
    Gufmeister Leonard Smalls's Avatar
    Join Date
     Aug 2005
    Posts
     7,842
    Location
     Shropshire Borders,
    Turn Table
     Clearaudio
    T/Arm & Cart
     SME
    SUT/Phono
     EAR
    Digital Source 1
     Advantage
    Speakers
     Leema/Ditton
    Pre Amp
     Bow
    Power Amp
     Bryston
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    i_should_coco wrote:
    Interestingly, I was thinking about photography the other day and the luminance dynamic range of the best D-SLRs is about 10 stops, or 10-bits. Seems our ears might be better than our eyes. ;)
    Aye.. I remember a demo years ago where the effect of different bit rates on video was shown - anything up to 10 bit was largely rubbish (at least on a grade 1 monitor), 10 and higher was largely indistinguishable (we're still talking 625 line grade 1).

    Minimum "acceptable" for audio was 12 bit compressed - IIRC NICAM...

  6. #6
    Wannabe dealer i_should_coco's Avatar
    Join Date
     Sep 2006
    Posts
     19,931
    Real Name
     Coco-san
    Turn Table
     Voyd Reference
    T/Arm & Cart
     AN Arm-3/Io Ltd.
    SUT/Phono
     AN S9/DIY LCR
    Digital Source 1
     Laptop/JRiver
    DAC
     Nadja
    Speakers
     YL Acoustic active
    Pre Amp
     Nadja DSP
    Power Amp
     Lots
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    Leonard Smalls wrote:
    i_should_coco wrote:
    Interestingly, I was thinking about photography the other day and the luminance dynamic range of the best D-SLRs is about 10 stops, or 10-bits. Seems our ears might be better than our eyes. ;)
    Aye.. I remember a demo years ago where the effect of different bit rates on video was shown - anything up to 10 bit was largely rubbish (at least on a grade 1 monitor), 10 and higher was largely indistinguishable (we're still talking 625 line grade 1).

    Minimum "acceptable" for audio was 12 bit compressed - IIRC NICAM...
    Not sure if I was clear, I didn't mean 10-bit colour (most computers these days use 24-bit, but that's 8 bits per colour). I mean the absolute luminance dynamic range, from pure black to pure white. Up until recently cameras have used 12-bit processing and I think the latest models use 14-bits.
    CD players - computer audio for dummies.

  7. #7
    Gufmeister Leonard Smalls's Avatar
    Join Date
     Aug 2005
    Posts
     7,842
    Location
     Shropshire Borders,
    Turn Table
     Clearaudio
    T/Arm & Cart
     SME
    SUT/Phono
     EAR
    Digital Source 1
     Advantage
    Speakers
     Leema/Ditton
    Pre Amp
     Bow
    Power Amp
     Bryston
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    i_should_coco wrote:
    Not sure if I was clear, I didn't mean 10-bit colour (most computers these days use 24-bit, but that's 8 bits per colour). I mean the absolute luminance dynamic range, from pure black to pure white. Up until recently cameras have used 12-bit processing and I think the latest models use 14-bits.
    IIRC, which I possibly don't as it was a long time ago, 10 bits was the minimum just for Y to get good quality... Fair enough I spose as MPEG1 used 12 for Y,U and V!

    The bit rate for a proper component system, such as the early SonyD1, was 10 each. Which got expensive for early HDTV (at 1250 lines) as they used one D1 machine for each component, at getting on for £100k per machine!

    If you looked at Panasonic's (I'm still only talking video here, know bugger all about still cameras!) D3 that used only 8 bits per sample for uncompressed composite video.. Still £30k per machine though - now you can pick one up for pennies.

  8. #8
    Sceptical Wammer
    Join Date
     Oct 2005
    Posts
     4,233
    Location
     East Midlands, Unite
    Real Name
     Tony
    Turn Table
     Lenco Soup
    Digital Source 1
     Rotel RCD991
    Integrated Amp
     Wad Kat88
    Speakers
     Spendor S100
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     Yes

    Post imported post

    Fascinating stuff. So if I understand this right the sampling frequency just limits the maximum frequency recorded and has no effect on resolution within that limit. Is that right?

  9. #9
    Wannabe dealer i_should_coco's Avatar
    Join Date
     Sep 2006
    Posts
     19,931
    Real Name
     Coco-san
    Turn Table
     Voyd Reference
    T/Arm & Cart
     AN Arm-3/Io Ltd.
    SUT/Phono
     AN S9/DIY LCR
    Digital Source 1
     Laptop/JRiver
    DAC
     Nadja
    Speakers
     YL Acoustic active
    Pre Amp
     Nadja DSP
    Power Amp
     Lots
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    Uncle Ants wrote:
    Fascinating stuff. So if I understand this right the sampling frequency just limits the maximum frequency recorded and has no effect on resolution within that limit. Is that right?
    Yes, that's it.
    CD players - computer audio for dummies.

  10. #10
    Sceptical Wammer
    Join Date
     Oct 2005
    Posts
     4,233
    Location
     East Midlands, Unite
    Real Name
     Tony
    Turn Table
     Lenco Soup
    Digital Source 1
     Rotel RCD991
    Integrated Amp
     Wad Kat88
    Speakers
     Spendor S100
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     Yes

    Post imported post

    i_should_coco wrote:
    Uncle Ants wrote:
    Fascinating stuff. So if I understand this right the sampling frequency just limits the maximum frequency recorded and has no effect on resolution within that limit. Is that right?
    Yes, that's it.
    Excellent I learned something today. I was under the impression that the higher the sampling rate the higher the resolution at all frequencies ... so what does increased bit depth do for us?

  11. #11
    Wannabe dealer i_should_coco's Avatar
    Join Date
     Sep 2006
    Posts
     19,931
    Real Name
     Coco-san
    Turn Table
     Voyd Reference
    T/Arm & Cart
     AN Arm-3/Io Ltd.
    SUT/Phono
     AN S9/DIY LCR
    Digital Source 1
     Laptop/JRiver
    DAC
     Nadja
    Speakers
     YL Acoustic active
    Pre Amp
     Nadja DSP
    Power Amp
     Lots
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    Uncle Ants wrote:
    i_should_coco wrote:
    Uncle Ants wrote:
    Fascinating stuff. So if I understand this right the sampling frequency just limits the maximum frequency recorded and has no effect on resolution within that limit. Is that right?
    Yes, that's it.
    Excellent I learned something today. I was under the impression that the higher the sampling rate the higher the resolution at all frequencies ... so what does increased bit depth do for us?
    It allows more discrete steps to "measure" the amplitude of the waveform at that point in time. As we only have 65536 steps with 16 bits, 65536 gives a dynamic range of 96dB. We can only represent the amplitude as one of these discrete values. If the actual value differs sligthly, we round up or down. This is called "quantisation error" and becomes worse when trying to capture low level signals.

    If we have a waveform with a 2V peak to peak amplitude, the smallest step is 30.15mV and half of this is the maximum error. That's tiny compared to a full level signal. At lower levels, e.g. -40dB down, the signal is 0.02V, i.e. 20mV, so as you can see the smallesy step will be much greater than the signal leading to a huge error.

    Increasing bit depth to 24 bits, gives possibility of 16777216 steps, and using the same 2V reference, gives a smalles step of 0.000119mV. About a ten-thousandfold increase.
    CD players - computer audio for dummies.

  12. #12
    Sceptical Wammer
    Join Date
     Oct 2005
    Posts
     4,233
    Location
     East Midlands, Unite
    Real Name
     Tony
    Turn Table
     Lenco Soup
    Digital Source 1
     Rotel RCD991
    Integrated Amp
     Wad Kat88
    Speakers
     Spendor S100
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     Yes

    Post imported post

    i_should_coco wrote:
    Uncle Ants wrote:
    i_should_coco wrote:
    Uncle Ants wrote:
    Fascinating stuff. So if I understand this right the sampling frequency just limits the maximum frequency recorded and has no effect on resolution within that limit. Is that right?
    Yes, that's it.
    Excellent I learned something today. I was under the impression that the higher the sampling rate the higher the resolution at all frequencies ... so what does increased bit depth do for us?
    It allows more discrete steps to "measure" the amplitude of the waveform at that point in time. As we only have 65536 steps with 16 bits, 65536 gives a dynamic range of 96dB. We can only represent the amplitude as one of these discrete values. If the actual value differs sligthly, we round up or down. This is called "quantisation error" and becomes worse when trying to capture low level signals.

    If we have a waveform with a 2V peak to peak amplitude, the smallest step is 30.15mV and half of this is the maximum error. That's tiny compared to a full level signal. At lower levels, e.g. -40dB down, the signal is 0.02V, i.e. 20mV, so as you can see the smallesy step will be much greater than the signal leading to a huge error.
    I see, so its something which is going to matter on highly dynamic material but matter not a jot on say modern rock and pop stuff where it's all within 15db of the end stops.

  13. #13
    Wannabe dealer i_should_coco's Avatar
    Join Date
     Sep 2006
    Posts
     19,931
    Real Name
     Coco-san
    Turn Table
     Voyd Reference
    T/Arm & Cart
     AN Arm-3/Io Ltd.
    SUT/Phono
     AN S9/DIY LCR
    Digital Source 1
     Laptop/JRiver
    DAC
     Nadja
    Speakers
     YL Acoustic active
    Pre Amp
     Nadja DSP
    Power Amp
     Lots
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    Uncle Ants wrote:
    i_should_coco wrote:
    Uncle Ants wrote:
    i_should_coco wrote:
    Uncle Ants wrote:
    Fascinating stuff. So if I understand this right the sampling frequency just limits the maximum frequency recorded and has no effect on resolution within that limit. Is that right?
    Yes, that's it.
    Excellent I learned something today. I was under the impression that the higher the sampling rate the higher the resolution at all frequencies ... so what does increased bit depth do for us?
    It allows more discrete steps to "measure" the amplitude of the waveform at that point in time. As we only have 65536 steps with 16 bits, 65536 gives a dynamic range of 96dB. We can only represent the amplitude as one of these discrete values. If the actual value differs sligthly, we round up or down. This is called "quantisation error" and becomes worse when trying to capture low level signals.

    If we have a waveform with a 2V peak to peak amplitude, the smallest step is 30.15mV and half of this is the maximum error. That's tiny compared to a full level signal. At lower levels, e.g. -40dB down, the signal is 0.02V, i.e. 20mV, so as you can see the smallesy step will be much greater than the signal leading to a huge error.
    I see, so its something which is going to matter on highly dynamic material but matter not a jot on say modern rock and pop stuff where it's all within 15db of the end stops.
    Not exactly, there can still be low level harmonic content riding on the large waveform, and you stil need to capture that.
    CD players - computer audio for dummies.

  14. #14
    Sceptical Wammer
    Join Date
     Oct 2005
    Posts
     4,233
    Location
     East Midlands, Unite
    Real Name
     Tony
    Turn Table
     Lenco Soup
    Digital Source 1
     Rotel RCD991
    Integrated Amp
     Wad Kat88
    Speakers
     Spendor S100
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     Yes

    Post imported post

    i_should_coco wrote:
    Not exactly, there can still be low level harmonic content riding on the large waveform, and you stil need to capture that.
    Okay, yeah that makes sense

  15. #15
    Wammer ultrawomble's Avatar
    Join Date
     Oct 2006
    Posts
     1,729
    Location
     Manchester
    Real Name
     Jim
    Turn Table
     SL-1210M5G
    Digital Source 1
     Exposure 2010S
    Integrated Amp
     MF A3.5
    Speakers
     MA GS10
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    Interesting thread. So what's the standard sample depth or rate used by recording studios? Is most stuff recorded at CD level, or is it recorded at a higher level and down sampled to fit the relevant formats being marketed?

  16. #16
    Wammer ultrawomble's Avatar
    Join Date
     Oct 2006
    Posts
     1,729
    Location
     Manchester
    Real Name
     Jim
    Turn Table
     SL-1210M5G
    Digital Source 1
     Exposure 2010S
    Integrated Amp
     MF A3.5
    Speakers
     MA GS10
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    Interesting thread. So what's the standard sample depth or rate used by recording studios? Is most stuff recorded at CD level, or is it recorded at a higher level and down sampled to fit the relevant formats being marketed?

  17. #17
    Wannabe dealer i_should_coco's Avatar
    Join Date
     Sep 2006
    Posts
     19,931
    Real Name
     Coco-san
    Turn Table
     Voyd Reference
    T/Arm & Cart
     AN Arm-3/Io Ltd.
    SUT/Phono
     AN S9/DIY LCR
    Digital Source 1
     Laptop/JRiver
    DAC
     Nadja
    Speakers
     YL Acoustic active
    Pre Amp
     Nadja DSP
    Power Amp
     Lots
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    ultrawomble wrote:
    Interesting thread. So what's the standard sample depth or rate used by recording studios? Is most stuff recorded at CD level, or is it recorded at a higher level and down sampled to fit the relevant formats being marketed?
    I think the answer is: It varies. I suspect a lot either use DSD or 24/96 24/192.

    I'm not actually sure whether it's possible to accuratly build a 24-bit multi-bit DAC - it has 24 current sources and the smallest one has to be exactly 1/16777216 the size of the largest one. Quite a tall order! I recall reading that the limit of current production capability is about 20-bit, either that, or the output of the last 4 bits is below the noise flooor, but that was a couple of years ago, so it could be different now.

    For the record: playing a 16-bit source through a 24-bit DAC does not increase the resolution to 24-bits, The extra 8-bits are usually padded out with 0s or 1s.
    CD players - computer audio for dummies.

  18. #18
    Sceptical Wammer
    Join Date
     Oct 2005
    Posts
     4,233
    Location
     East Midlands, Unite
    Real Name
     Tony
    Turn Table
     Lenco Soup
    Digital Source 1
     Rotel RCD991
    Integrated Amp
     Wad Kat88
    Speakers
     Spendor S100
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     Yes

    Post imported post

    Another question. Cd uses a sampling rate of 44.1Khz ... DAT uses 48KHz ... studios use 96KHz.

    48 KHz is exactly half 96 and presumably its mathematically straightforward reducing the one to the other. Is it a messy job, mathematically converting down fro 96 0r 48 to 44.1KHz? Intuitively I'd have thought so .. but I don't know so.

  19. #19
    Wammer I like valves.'s Avatar
    Join Date
     May 2007
    Posts
     225
    Location
     Lancashire, United K
    Real Name
     Simon
    Turn Table
     My own
    T/Arm & Cart
     SME3012 Transfig Sp
    SUT/Phono
     Naim 323 cards
    Digital Source 1
     Avondale AAA5
    Digital Source 2
     Naim CD3
    Speakers
     IMF TLS80
    Pre Amp
     Transcendent
    Power Amp
     Jolida Music Envoys
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    I don't understand any of this so I'll stick with vinyl.

    Si.
    Si.

  20. #20
    Moderator meninblack's Avatar
    Join Date
     Jul 2005
    Posts
     20,400
    Location
     Erehwon
    Real Name
     Mr Pink-and-Yellow
    Turn Table
     Palmer 3.0
    T/Arm & Cart
     AN Arm 3/II & Io1
    SUT/Phono
     Kondo KSL-SFz
    Digital Source 1
     dCS P8i
    Digital Source 2
     SB3
    DAC
     AN DAC 2.1x/II Bal.
    Speakers
     Tannoy Kensington SE
    Pre Amp
     Audio Note M5 Phono
    Power Amp
     Air Tight ATM-1
    In the Hi-Fi industry?
     No

    Post imported post

    Uncle Ants wrote:
    Another question. Cd uses a sampling rate of 44.1Khz ... DAT uses 48KHz ... studios use 96KHz.

    48 KHz is exactly half 96 and presumably its mathematically straightforward reducing the one to the other. Is it a messy job, mathematically converting down fro 96 0r 48 to 44.1KHz? Intuitively I'd have thought so .. but I don't know so.
    Yes, quite so! It is believed that 48 kHz was selected for DAT to make digital copying (piracy) of CD's onto DAT more difficult for the relatively primitive equipment of the time.

    The origins of 44.1 kHz lie in the history of digital audio. In the early days, the only medium with both the bandwidth and the storage capacity for digital audio was video tape. NTSC video used a 245 line half-frame at 60 Hz, PAL video used a 294-line half-frame at 50 Hz. The lowest common multiple that would get you over the Nyquist criterion of 40 kHz was 3, hence 245 x 60 x 3 = 294 x 50 x 3 = 44.1 kHz.


    "I'm a Twat" - Cloth-Ears, 02/02/2014

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •