Posted by Biz on 02/19/06 01:52

"waterspout" <wtspt.cb@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:PaNJf.24581$m13.2127@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Biz" <spamoff@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:YTsJf.31226$Jd.13092@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
> >
> > "waterspout" <wtspt.cb@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> > news:U1sJf.1392$58.766@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
> >>
> >> "only human" <surfer989@webtv.net> wrote in message
> >> news:20472-43E8D7EB-68@storefull-3114.bay.webtv.net...
> >> > Um their would if he used something like a sound mixer with his
> >> > recorder
> >> > which enhances any audio source material.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Why would you say that DVD offers an audio advantage over CD? You
cannot
> >> hear the difference between audio sampled at 48k or 44.1k.
> >>
> >
> > I guess you think that SACD's and DVD-A disks just a waste of money
then?
> > No, there is not a great deal of difference between the two you
mentioned
> > above, but when you start using 24-bit resolution, and even higher
> > sampling
> > rates, 96khz, 192khz like is available on DVD-A, it makes quite a
> > noticeable
> > difference...of course you wont hear it on a boombox, or some crappy PC
> > speakers, but serious listeners, with solid gear can easily pick it
out...
> >
>
> You only think you can hear it I'm afraid. Unless you have superhuman
> hearing, no-one can hear audio above about 18kHz and even then you have to
> be in your prime to hear that. The 44.1 kHz sampling frequency easily
> reproduces 18 kHz. Sampling frequencies above that reproduce audio
> frequencies that the human ear cannot hear. Don't kid yourselves and don't
> waste your money.
>
>
HIgher sampling frequency allows more samples per second, meaning that you
can aproximate the waveform that much more accurately. It doesnt have to
have anythign at all to do with higher frequencies in the actual music.
Harmonics out of the range of human hearing DO affect the way you hear the
frequencies that you CAN hear....Audio theory 101....

[Back to original message]