> Thaks again Raimund - I have an annoying habit of asking questions until =
I
> really understand something -
> are you saying that there is no advantage to having 4 samples representin=
g a
> waveform rather than say 2 samples ? Does this mean 2 samples is sufficie=
nt to accurately record a waveform ?
Hmmm, that would depend on the bandwidth of the waveform and the frequency =
range that you are interested in.
If you sampled for instance a pure 20 kHz sine signal (which does not have =
any harmonics) at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz, then the signal is in any case=
accurately represented.
If the waveform however had an additional harmonic component at 40 kHz, the=
n it was not sufficient to accurately represent that waveform by using a sa=
mple rate of only 44.1 kHz. The inbuilt anti-aliasing filter of the recorde=
r would then just remove the harmonic at 40 kHz, which would of course chan=
ge the original waveform. Instead one had to use a sample rate of 96 kHz fo=
r instance. Nevertheless, if you were not interested in the harmonic compon=
ent at 40 kHz (which is in any case inaudible for the human ear), then it w=
ould also be acceptable to record it at a rate of 44.k kHz only.
Regards,
Raimund
this is what I meant. If you sampled the waveform
|