On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 04:33:13PM +0200, Florian Schmidt wrote: > > This seems like a sensible idea, but one could wonder why in that case > > the sample frequency needs to be 96 kHz (*). > > Well, the argument i often heard and which IMHO does make sense is that > when heavy processing is used the higher samplerate keeps many artefacts > out of the audible range for a longer time than with 48khz for example. Yes, the desire to keep some algorithms simple is one good reason to use 96 kHz. I do it as well in Aeolus, where parts of some of the wavetables are computed at 2, 3 or 4 the output sample rate, to allow linear interpolation at run time. -- FA
