naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

11. why recording at 96kHz or more ? [it was ....Re: Noise rel

Subject: 11. why recording at 96kHz or more ? [it was ....Re: Noise rel
From: "Raimund Specht" animalsounds
Date: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:34 am ((PDT))
Gianni, you wrote:
> increasing the sample rate may extend the dynamic range in the sense
> that it reduces the quantization noise. This could be a real benefit
> if not masked by other background noises due to the analog front-end.

Yes, that would be true in theory. The effect would be relatively
small. Doubling the original sample rate of the A/D converter and
downsampling the soundfile afterwards would theoretically decrease the
quantization noise by 3dB (two samples of the original recording can
be averaged into a singe sample).

This downsampling or averaging process is actually already done inside
any 96kHz-capable sigma-delta converter when you select a sample rate
of 48 kHz.

Typical sigma-delta converters use a internal (input) sample rate of
3072 kHz, regardless of the selected output sample rate. For instance,
if you select a sample rate of 96 kHz, there would take place an
internal decimation by 32 (3072kHz / 32 =3D 96kHz). If you select 48
kHz, the input will be decimatated by factor 64 (3072 kHz / 64 =3D 48 kHz).

So, under these circumstances, doubling of the sample rate would just
be a waste of storage space...

Raimund







<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • 11. why recording at 96kHz or more ? [it was ....Re: Noise rel, Raimund Specht <=
Admin

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