> of the artifical test signal from 44.1 to 48 kHz and then
> transferred the data. The resulting spectrogram shows incredible
> artifacts:
FWIW in the studio world, one can spend many thousands of dollars on
dedicated hardware to do high-quality resampling; the software I use
(Samplitude) has a 'high quality' mode that can take an *extremely* long
time to do best-quality (nearly artifact-free) conversion...
...the received wisdom is, if you're ever going to deliver on CD, record
at 44.1. There's a running debate about whether 88.2 is a better choice
for high-sample rate recording than 96, specifically because it's easier
to drop every other sample than resample...
...since I record on MD at 44.1, it's never been an issue for me.
best,
aaron
http://www.quietamerican.org
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|