Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen
k.s.matheussen at notam02.no
Fri Jul 9 07:51:24 EDT 2004
> ->My impression is that the more maths an audio professional knows, the
> sure the audio professional is that higher sampling rates is a
> bad thing. (unless you are recording sounds that is later going to be
> downsampled a lot of course)
> Perhaps its impossible for us non-skilled-mathematicians to
> understand properly why 96 kHz is a bad thing...<-
> One thing 96K provides is plenty of headroom for aliasing if you're
> doing some kind of novel synthesis technique that tends to generate tons
> of high partials... the 24 bits are nice, too.
I was actually just thinking about 96kHz for recording/playback, not
processing. I guess I lost the context of the discussion.
More information about the linux-audio-user