How about taking this to:
digital.stuff.rec.boring
ZZZZzzzzz....
----- Original Message -----
From: Neil Bradley <nb@...>
Cc: <motm@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: [motm] Re: OT: Tales from an Audiophiles Crypt
> >> represent higher frequencies (and possibly to design a better
> >> real-world filter).
> >And represent the original waveshape better provided it's not a sine
wave.
> Not in any way except by representing higher frequencies.
> Weren't we just here?
Yes, and what you're stating is incorrect. ;-)
If I have a 20khz sample rate, and I have the following waveforms being
sampled (assuming PERFECT alignment of the sample point and the peaks of
each cycle of each waveform):
10Khz Sine wave
10Khz Square wave
10Khz Sawtooth wave
10Khz Pulse wave
When played back at the same 20khz sample rate, they are ∗ALL∗ going to be
sine waves (assuming an ideal filter, of course). The peaks from the
sawtooth wave are now rounded.
Now let's assume a 40khz sample rate with the same 10Khz signals above.
Each waveform looks quite a bit closer to its original. Therefore, a
higher sample rate == higher detail at the same original input frequency.
If you double the sample rate, you double the significant samples within a
waveform, making it closer to the original. Hopefully this clears it up
100%.
-->Neil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Neil Bradley In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is not
Synthcom Systems, Inc. king - he's a prisoner.
ICQ #29402898
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/