Mosvalve
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1194
- Joined: 2009/11/20 20:49:33
- Location: New Jersey
- Status: offline
BobV ASUS Prime Z370-P - Intel Core i7+ 8700K 3.7GHZ 16GB Memory, Intel HD Graphics 630 GPU, Windows 10 Pro 64bit, , Sonar Platinum 64bit, Motu 828MK3 Hybrid, Warm Audio TB12 Pre, Warm Audio WA273 Pre, AEA RPQ 500 Pre, Warm Audio WA76 Compressor, Presonus D8 Pre, Tonelux EQ5P 500 Eq, Kush Electra 500 Eq, Lindell PEX 500 Eq, Yamaha 80M monitors with HS10W Sub, and a bunch of other good stuff. I have a Roland Juno-106 that's looking for a new home. PM me.
|
craigb
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 41704
- Joined: 2009/01/28 23:13:04
- Location: The Pacific Northwestshire
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 02:14:25
(permalink)
Bill is dealing with high rates in that other thread right now!
Time for all of you to head over to Beyond My DAW!
|
Moshkito
Max Output Level: -37.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3765
- Joined: 2015/01/26 13:29:07
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 09:23:36
(permalink)
Hi,
I'll check this at home, but I think radio history is more fun! Sampling rates ... hmmmm .... probably gone tomorrow?
Music is not about notes and chords! My poem is not about the computer or monitor or letters! It's about how I was able to translate it from my insides!
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 10:04:44
(permalink)
Moshkito
Hi,
I'll check this at home, but I think radio history is more fun! Sampling rates ... hmmmm .... probably gone tomorrow?
Eh? FYI - 'Sample rate' is the number of samples of a sound that are taken per second to represent the event digitally. The more samples taken per second, the more accurate the digital representation of the sound. For example, the sample rate for CD-quality audio is 44,100 samples.
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|
Moshkito
Max Output Level: -37.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3765
- Joined: 2015/01/26 13:29:07
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 10:22:50
(permalink)
jamesg1213
Moshkito
Hi,
I'll check this at home, but I think radio history is more fun! Sampling rates ... hmmmm .... probably gone tomorrow?
Eh?
FYI - 'Sample rate' is the number of samples of a sound that are taken per second to represent the event digitally.
The more samples taken per second, the more accurate the digital representation of the sound. For example, the sample rate for CD-quality audio is 44,100 samples.
I knew that ... was just having fun with it. As time goes by, this will likely change since technology is forever moving forward, and a new standard will be in place. I doubt that a sample will ever be better than the recording sample, but it is very likely that the samples, sooner or later, will make any instrument sound terrible, because you can't tune it right or perfectly.
Music is not about notes and chords! My poem is not about the computer or monitor or letters! It's about how I was able to translate it from my insides!
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 12:35:24
(permalink)
jamesg1213
The more samples taken per second, the more accurate the digital representation of the sound. For example, the sample rate for CD-quality audio is 44,100 samples.
Be careful here - it's only "more accurate" in that it contains higher frequencies. What the sampling theorem proves is that if you filter out everything greater than one half the sample rate, then everything that happens between the samples is stored in the samples. It can't be any "more accurate" once you already have all of the data. In theory it works perfectly, but in practice we end up with some filter artifacts and also have to start filtering things out a little below 1/2 the sampling rate. A higher sampling rate allows one to move artifacts to a higher frequency as well as capture higher frequencies, but otherwise it's not any "more accurate".
 In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 12:40:20
(permalink)
drewfx1
Be careful here
Will do, Drew. I was just trying to point Pedro towards what the thread is actually about, as opposed to what he thinks it's about. Given up on that now.
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|
craigb
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 41704
- Joined: 2009/01/28 23:13:04
- Location: The Pacific Northwestshire
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 12:40:22
(permalink)
drewfx1
jamesg1213
The more samples taken per second, the more accurate the digital representation of the sound. For example, the sample rate for CD-quality audio is 44,100 samples.
Be careful here - it's only "more accurate" in that it contains higher frequencies.
What the sampling theorem proves is that if you filter out everything greater than one half the sample rate, then everything that happens between the samples is stored in the samples. It can't be any "more accurate" once you already have all of the data.
In theory it works perfectly, but in practice we end up with some filter artifacts and also have to start filtering things out a little below 1/2 the sampling rate. A higher sampling rate allows one to move artifacts to a higher frequency as well as capture higher frequencies, but otherwise it's not any "more accurate".
Wait a minute... is your rebuttal about sampling rate or resolution (e.g., usually 16-bit for CD's)? 'Cause it sounds like you're talking about resolution. Sampling rate shouldn't have much to do with the frequency, only in the accuracy of tracking the changes in the music, no?
Time for all of you to head over to Beyond My DAW!
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 13:14:56
(permalink)
craigb
drewfx1
jamesg1213
The more samples taken per second, the more accurate the digital representation of the sound. For example, the sample rate for CD-quality audio is 44,100 samples.
Be careful here - it's only "more accurate" in that it contains higher frequencies.
What the sampling theorem proves is that if you filter out everything greater than one half the sample rate, then everything that happens between the samples is stored in the samples. It can't be any "more accurate" once you already have all of the data.
In theory it works perfectly, but in practice we end up with some filter artifacts and also have to start filtering things out a little below 1/2 the sampling rate. A higher sampling rate allows one to move artifacts to a higher frequency as well as capture higher frequencies, but otherwise it's not any "more accurate".
Wait a minute... is your rebuttal about sampling rate or resolution (e.g., usually 16-bit for CD's)? 'Cause it sounds like you're talking about resolution. Sampling rate shouldn't have much to do with the frequency, only in the accuracy of tracking the changes in the music, no?
Sampling rate really only has to do with frequency, not resolution. From a practical standpoint in the real world all anyone really needs to know about audio sampling can be summarized as follows: Higher sampling rate = higher frequencies Higher bit depth = less noise So once you can reproduce a signal to the high frequency limits of your hearing with the noise too quiet for you to hear at a given listening level, you're done. Simple as that.
In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
|
rabeach
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2703
- Joined: 2004/01/26 14:56:13
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 13:23:27
(permalink)
I read most of the article thought it was well written but what the sampling theorem actually states is; if you have a signal that is perfectly band limited to a bandwidth of f0 then you can collect all the information there is in that signal by sampling it at discrete times, as long as your sample rate is greater than 2f0. Perfect band limiting is not possible. Therefore we are left with optimal reconstruction not perfect reconstruction.
|
rabeach
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2703
- Joined: 2004/01/26 14:56:13
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 13:50:16
(permalink)
Incidentally, both analog tape and vinyl in an abstract way can be thought of as sampling systems due to the mechanics of the stylus and tape head contact. The stylus actually bounces up and down in the groove of the vinyl and the tape does not remain perfectly, under constant tension continuously, in contact with the tape head. These inconsistencies could be viewed as sampling of the medium. There could also be a plethora of arguments against those statements. :-)
post edited by rabeach - 2016/02/05 14:06:46
|
rabeach
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2703
- Joined: 2004/01/26 14:56:13
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 13:50:16
(permalink)
...double post
post edited by rabeach - 2016/02/05 14:05:37
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 13:57:14
(permalink)
rabeach
Perfect band limiting is not possible. Therefore we are left with optimal reconstruction not perfect reconstruction.
Which in the real world means: 1. We start rolling off a little before one half the sampling rate. 2. We don't have perfect (infinite) attenuation of frequencies greater than one half the sampling rate. 3. We can have some imperfections in the frequencies we want to keep. If you look at the spec sheets of modern ADC/DAC chips, you will find that the designers typically start rolling off at ~20kHz for 44.1kHz (#1), try to attenuate so that any aliasing will be below the existing noise floor of the chip (#2), and reduce #3 as much as possible. Typically they also use the exact same filter at 96/88.2kHz as 48/44.1kHz, but the cutoff frequency is an octave higher. Some chips allow for different compromises to be made, such as a "low latency" mode where it might start rolling off at 17kHz and less attenuation.
In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
|
craigb
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 41704
- Joined: 2009/01/28 23:13:04
- Location: The Pacific Northwestshire
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 17:42:13
(permalink)
drewfx1
craigb
drewfx1
jamesg1213
The more samples taken per second, the more accurate the digital representation of the sound. For example, the sample rate for CD-quality audio is 44,100 samples.
Be careful here - it's only "more accurate" in that it contains higher frequencies.
What the sampling theorem proves is that if you filter out everything greater than one half the sample rate, then everything that happens between the samples is stored in the samples. It can't be any "more accurate" once you already have all of the data.
In theory it works perfectly, but in practice we end up with some filter artifacts and also have to start filtering things out a little below 1/2 the sampling rate. A higher sampling rate allows one to move artifacts to a higher frequency as well as capture higher frequencies, but otherwise it's not any "more accurate".
Wait a minute... is your rebuttal about sampling rate or resolution (e.g., usually 16-bit for CD's)? 'Cause it sounds like you're talking about resolution. Sampling rate shouldn't have much to do with the frequency, only in the accuracy of tracking the changes in the music, no?
Sampling rate really only has to do with frequency, not resolution.
From a practical standpoint in the real world all anyone really needs to know about audio sampling can be summarized as follows:
Higher sampling rate = higher frequencies
Higher bit depth = less noise
So once you can reproduce a signal to the high frequency limits of your hearing with the noise too quiet for you to hear at a given listening level, you're done. Simple as that.
Duh. Of course it is! I really shouldn't try to think right after I wake up and before having coffee... 
Time for all of you to head over to Beyond My DAW!
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re: By Justin Colletti The Science of Sample Rates
2016/02/05 19:00:49
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby craigb 2016/02/05 20:45:52
 Optimal sample rate depends on whether or not you're diabetic, and who's watching.
 All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|