Skip to main content

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio? (Read 86137 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio?

Reply #100
Just got done recording a bat conversation @ 576 KHz.  The problem is I couldn't hear any of it.  :P
OK, so you posted this for the humour... but some people must have such needs in real life research. Hearing it? Well, slow the tape down of course!
The most important audio cables are the ones in the brain

Re: What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio?

Reply #101
How so? huge IIR filters are not nonlinear.
I was under the impression that standard reverb algorithms introduced time-variant "stuff" in the filter topology to reduce audible artifacts, making them non-LTI?

Nevertheless, I assume that the kind of nonlinearities "warned" about by Arnold in terms of aliasing was of a very different kind: Signal-dependent gain with non-smooth envelope.

-k

That would depend on the reverb, I might say.
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston

Re: What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio?

Reply #102
An interesting test would be 32 kHz vs 44.1 kHz (or 48 kHz). I did a limited one some years ago and irc lots of people failed even that.

p.s. Actually DCC used that sampling rate.
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung


Re: What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio?

Reply #104
Interesting test, indeed.

I've taken a sample from one of my favorite tracks (sample1). Then resampled that to 32 kHz using lvqcl's SoX component (default settings), and again to 44.1 kHz (sample2).

And...
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 2.0.2 report
foobar2000 v1.3.13
2016-11-25 22:27:37

File A: sample1.flac
SHA1: 765511fc2863f842b789ce304cb1a1cafa5e31a5
Gain adjustment: -6.21 dB
File B: sample2(32kHz).flac
SHA1: 8283b03fe88a153c88681b8a98b5ec0acbc9ccd9
Gain adjustment: -6.11 dB

Output:
WASAPI (event) : Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio), 24-bit
Crossfading: NO

22:27:37 : Test started.
22:28:22 : 00/01
22:29:25 : 01/02
22:29:57 : 01/03
22:30:30 : 02/04
22:30:56 : 02/05
22:31:23 : 03/06
22:31:48 : 04/07
22:32:18 : 04/08
22:32:45 : 05/09
22:33:08 : 05/10
22:33:33 : 06/11
22:34:02 : 06/12
22:34:31 : 06/13
22:34:58 : 06/14
22:35:28 : 06/15
22:35:52 : 06/16
22:35:52 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 6/16
Probability that you were guessing: 89.5%

 -- signature --
b750e35d423ce912218069de0333cc83c2ab2c26
...Failed miserably.  :D
| TAK pMax | QAAC ~ 192 kbps |


Re: What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio?

Reply #106
Just got done recording a bat conversation @ 576 KHz.  The problem is I couldn't hear any of it.  :P
OK, so you posted this for the humour... but some people must have such needs in real life research. Hearing it? Well, slow the tape down of course!

IIRC, bat hearing rolls off a lot above 100 kHz; maybe dolphins... (they can image with ultrasound, as the eye does with EMF)

Re: What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio?

Reply #107
The only possible advantages I can see for 192khz sample rates are lower latency for live instruments into DAWs and digital equipment, and recording wildlife that uses very high frequency sounds .

 

Re: What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio?

Reply #108
Just got done recording a bat conversation @ 576 KHz.  The problem is I couldn't hear any of it.  :P
OK, so you posted this for the humour... but some people must have such needs in real life research. Hearing it? Well, slow the tape down of course!

I am one of those people. I have been conducting studies in the Amazon of very high frequency animals (insects etc)  slowed down to audible ranges.  There are some very strange sound sbeen made in the very high frequency bands. My challenge is nyquist of course and I hope to head back out there with equipment capable of recording higher frequencies (ie 576 khz sample rate would "only "record sounds up to 288 khz)

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2021