View Single Post
  #27  
Old 07-13-2010, 05:31 PM
spicemix spicemix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 771
Default Re: 44.1 kHz vs. 48 kHz - why not use the higher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Park Seward View Post
"The's also why resampling at integer multiples or divisors would be less likely to distort, the math is simpler and less prone to round-off error. If we're downsampling from 96 to 48 all we need do is throw away every other sample. If we're upsampling, each new sample lies exactly halfway between the old and all we have to do is set its value to the average of the two old samples on either side of it. But if that new sample has to be inserted at .345654 of the time between two old samples and the next one is at .897667 of the time difference, and only a few of the new samples fall exactly on the same time mark as the old ones, now we got the problem in interpolation."

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-thin...important.html

Sampling rate conversion is simplified if rates are integer multiples of each other.

Here are some interesting charts comparing SRC with different manufacturers:

http://src.infinitewave.ca/
You are quoting some guy who for all I know is a home theatre consumer and has no professional audio expertise whatsoever.

Go ahead and try your sample dropping approach and let us know how it sounds.

Today those factors are irrelevant in the better algos.
__________________
Peter Jensen
spicemix
Reply With Quote