[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: TP701, Audio
- To: thinkpad@cs.utk.edu
- Subject: Re: TP701, Audio
- From: billy@MIX.COM
- Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 17:06:15 -0700 (MST)
- Comment: to {un}subscribe, send mail to thinkpad-REQUEST@cs.utk.edu
- In-Reply-To: "Message dated Sun, 08 Feb 1998 17:34:44 -0800"<199802090136.RAA23975@stevie.loop.com>
- Sender: Billy@MIX.COM
> >22kHz is a bit high for a 44.1kHz sampling rate - the high frequency
> >limit is one half the sampling rate...
> >
> I don't quite understand (for a change. <g> ). Could you explain that
> again, please?
In the world of digital sound recording and transmission there is
what's called (I believe) Shannon's law (many years since I was in
school) which says the highest frequency that can be digitized is
one-half the digital sampling rate. Thus a 44.1kHz sample rate
system can only go up to 22.05kHz. Then there are anti-aliasing
low-pass filters to enforce this, but they are not perfect so there's
some gradual decline in frequency response before hitting the actual
cutoff point. Since in this case you are only 50Hz away in practice
there will not be much left of your signal after going through this
filter.
For what it's worth any decent analog tape recorder running at
15 ips (inches per second) or faster would record this quite well.
Or if you could sample at 48kHz you might have a chance of getting
it that way too. I don't know what software might be available
for the Thinkpad at that sample rate though.
The next step in commercial systems looks like a 96kHz sample
rate - if this eventually finds its way into notebook computers
you'd have no trouble at all, but that's probably a year or
two away.
Billy Y..
- Follow-Ups:
- (no subject)
- From: "Gustavo Sepulveda Salas" <gsepulveda@novared.cl>