| Subject: | Re: Sampling rate conversion |
|---|---|
| From: | "artistico7" <> |
| Date: | Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:54:10 -0000 |
--- In "ANDREW CARTER" <> wrote: > At the risk of being totally incorrect (as an ignorant newbie) - in converting from 48 to 44 is there not the risk of of an interference pattern (the two rates being fairly close together) - or am I wrongly understanding the processes involved? I've not experimented much with this either, but to me it also sounds like dithering from 48 to 44KHz might best be avoided. Hakon Soreide www.hakonsoreide.com ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Re: Sampling rate conversion, ANDREW CARTER |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Cuban tree Frogs, Walter Knapp |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Re: Sampling rate conversion, ANDREW CARTER |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Sampling rate conversion, Walter Knapp |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU