Re: 192kHz

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: 192kHz
From: Carlo Capocasa <capocasa@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:17:23 +0100
In-reply-to: <43D8D02B.2060405@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <draf37$q7i$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060126082927.55f1bee7.jh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <43D8D02B.2060405@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: A list for linux audio users <linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-audio-user-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051017)

> 24bit
> dynamic range

Oh so the bit depth has more influence on dynamic range while the
sampling frequency has more influence on... errr, resolution? What would
that be, psychoacoustically... 'Finesse'?

Thanks for sharing!

Carlo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Re: 192kHz
  - From: Florin Andrei
- Re: Re: 192kHz
  - From: Hannu Savolainen

References:
- 192kHz
  - From: Carlo Capocasa
- Re: 192kHz
  - From: Joe Hartley
- Re: 192kHz
  - From: Cesare Marilungo

Prev by Date: Re: 192kHz
Next by Date: Re: 192kHz
Previous by thread: Re: 192kHz
Next by thread: Re: Re: 192kHz
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Sound] [ALSA Users] [Pulse Audio] [ALSA Devel] [Sox Users] [Linux Media] [Kernel] [Photo Sharing] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [Linux Media]

Powered by Linux