From: "ANDREW CARTER" <>
>
> 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?
> Andrew
This particular conversion has turned up in some soundcards. There are
lots of cheap 48khz chips around. The windows computer market is driven
by cheap prices so it's a way of cutting corners for the manufacturer.
It has, in that situation, resulted in a noticeable loss of quality for
at least some of the soundcards involved. But I don't think anybody has
reported that as a interference pattern. In probably all cases the
conversion method avoids that.
In general, even the best methods of conversion are not perfect. It is
better to minimize the number of times the sound is converted, and never
is the minimum.
A great lot of this jumping on higher sampling rates is hype. I see
folks using low level mics spending sums of money chasing a number, when
they would improve their sound far more spending it on mics. Even in the
high end few mics exist that are designed and optimized for the higher
sampling rates. And as we have seen with the MKH-800, compromises had to
be made in those.
As has been pointed out, the place where the higher rates can help a
little is in sound processing. They help to avoid round off errors in
the math. For most all the better sound editors the use of higher
sampling where needed is almost automatic. You can run your entire sound
path with 44k files, and not worry about it in that case. Certainly 48k
is not a significant change in sample rate as far as sound quality is
concerned.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|