"Dave" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley" wrote ...
You seem to be confusing uncompressed sampling rate with
compressed bit rate.
Ooh, dim bulb just went on. Each sample is then comprised of 16 bits?
Each sample of "CD quality" is comprised of 16 bits.
There is no general assumption for number of bits per sample.
That is the relationship I was looking for.
You may be oversimplifying the relationship. This only applies
to *uncompressed* streams which are sampled at 16-bit.
So, uh, taking my 32kpbs streaming rate as an example, I'd divide this by
the bit depth and divide again by the number of channels to determine the
sample rate... recording at 16-bit depth:
32,000 / (16 x 2) = 1000 or 1K sample rate to maintain equivalent
quality.
No! This is important: There is *NO* simple correlation between
uncompressed *SAMPLE* RATE and compressed *BIT* RATE.
A 1K sample rate will produce nothing resembling music unless you
are an elephant or a whale with hearing limited to ~500Hz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_frequency
Compressed *BIT* RATE is influenced by not only sample rate, but
ALSO by sample DEPTH and *compression RATE*.
If you want to chose an uncompressed sample rate that will
preserve *your percieved quality* of an de-compressed stream,
ONLY a subjective experiment and evaluation with YOUR EARS
will suffice. There is no mathematical calculation for this.