On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 02:55:13 GMT, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 13:32:36 -0600, (John Byrns) wrote:

In article .com,
"Joseph Meditz" wrote:

Although the OP is tangled up in his own underwear, I think that he's
alluding to the relationship between sampling rate and quantization
noise.

Can you explain the "relationship between sampling rate and quantization
noise"? I thought sampling and quantization were two independent effects,
sampling being an essentially analog effect creating no noise within the
signal bandwidth as long as the sampling rate is greater than two times
the signal bandwidth, while quantization is the conversion of sample
values to discrete digital values and does create noise?

Another way to say what Joseph means is that finite quantization
introduces what are effectively timing errors ("jitter") in the
complete A/D/A conversion.

While this is true, it's happening at more than 90dB below peak level.
I'm not aware of anyone having demonstrated an ability to hear the
difference among various sample rates, given a common signal
band-limited to the requirements of the lowest sampling rate, i.e. the
20kHz which is commonly taken to be the limit of human hearing.

In the A/D/A worlds, noise and distortion are *not* different things.
And neither are amplitude and frequency modulation distortions. (Or
course, they weren't in the old analog world either; we just didn't
talk about it that way).

Digital storage is theoretically perfect after being bandwidth
limited, dynamic range limited, and quantized-and-back monotonically.
Discussion really ought to be targeted at the limitations, IMO.

Indeed, and these limits are *way* below the limits of any analogue
system, indeed they're below the noise floor of most tube amps!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering