In article , New Geoff m.gjb SPHERICAL
wrote:

"Ian Molton" almost choked on his de-caffinated espresso...

OMFG. 400kHz sampling?

I dont think even a bat could hear the top end of the frequecy range
that allows.

But the point isn't the maximum frequency, it's the content of the
audible waveform . . . .

Remember the idea . . . increased frequency of sampling allows you to
reconstruct a waveform closer to the original analogue form . . . .??

Only if the 'original waveform' contained components at frequencies above
half the original sampling rate chosen.

And that would only matter if we are able to percieve the effect of the
presence/absence of the high frequency components that the lower sampling
rate was not adequate to capture.

Sampling Theorem.

And let's face it, a lot of 'musicality' is based on harmonics and the
interplay of notes, so you really do want a pretty big sampling rate to
make sure you catch it all . . .

Only for the harmonics, etc, at frequencies that have an audible effect.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html