home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!olivea!news.bbn.com!NewsWatcher!user
- From: shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline)
- Newsgroups: rec.audio
- Subject: Re: Anti-aliasing on the recording end?
- Message-ID: <shetline-230193113049@128.89.19.90>
- Date: 23 Jan 93 16:39:44 GMT
- References: <1993Jan21.205811.9048@news.columbia.edu> <1993Jan22.234435.3989@news.ysu.edu> <1993Jan23.073000.13305@news.columbia.edu>
- Followup-To: rec.audio
- Organization: BBN
- Lines: 28
- NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com
-
- In article <1993Jan23.073000.13305@news.columbia.edu>,
- gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) wrote:
- > >I doubt you would want to simply "discard" the extra samples. You then would
- > >lose the advantage of oversampling! I assume you mean you would digitally
- > >filter down to 44.1...
- >
- > The point is that by running the sampling clock X times faster, you
- > can use fewer poles on the *analog* side and use a smoother slope
- > filter. Digital filtering is more a concern in anti-imaging filters
- > (plauyback) than on anti-aliasing filters. On playback, oversampling
-
- First let's make sure we distinguish between 'oversampling' and running at
- higher sampling rates. Oversampling is a playback method that generates
- artificially interpolated samples between the data points that are already
- given. If you record at a higher sampling rate, however, you've got more
- real data.
-
- The advantage of recording with a higher sampling rate is that you don't
- need steep analog input filters. But this does mean that there can be
- frequencies greater than 22.05 emmbedded within the data stream. So you
- can't just throw away the extra samples. The data has to be processed to
- remove the higher frequencies.
-
- I understand the principles involved fairly well. I asked the question
- about anti-aliasing on the recording end to find out how it was done in
- practice.
-
- -Kerry
-