Yeah I have reservations too in this regard.
Actually last time I tested my hearing everything above 18k is dead, and I believe that this is still quite good.
But a lot of myths were debunked in this paper nevertheless. And that by one of the most respected ADC designers in the industry.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018, 10:21 Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2018 06:54:25 +0000, Moshe Werner wrote:
>In not everyone read it already:
>http://www.lavryengineering.com/pdfs/lavry-white-paper-the_optimal_sample_rate_for_quality_audio.pdf
I've got a few concerns regarding this paper, however, I like the
following claim a lot "It is always unwise and potentially harmful to
include signals that are not needed". Indeed, the noise flour of my RME
card does increase rapidly, if I switch from 48 to 192 KHz, without
gaining better quality for the hearable audio signal.
"However, even after adding an extra 10 KHz, we are talking about
bandwidth no higher than 40 KHz. That is why 88.2 or 96 KHz are
preferred rates for audio quality." I stopped reading here.
We had this already a few times on this list. What we need is 48 KHz,
but some audio interfaces sound better at 96 KHz, regarding the used
filters.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
