Re: How was 44.1/16 format decided on for CD?

[siguy]

Another good reason for rec'ing at a higher sample/bit rate (as if there weren't enough already) is that you can then apply fx and mastering tools to the higher rate data, while this may not seem important, it does allow for a much higher precision of calculation of effects such as reverb and distortion, this way you don't get nasty rounding errors creeping into the noticeable left bits of the samples, you also don't get those awesome harmonic distortions at around 22khz :)

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

siguy wrote:

> Another good reason for rec'ing at a higher sample/bit rate (as if
> there weren't enough already) is that you can then apply fx and
> mastering tools to the higher rate data, while this may not seem
> important, it does allow for a much higher precision of calculation
> of effects such as reverb and distortion, this way you don't get
> nasty rounding errors creeping into the noticeable left bits of the
> samples, you also don't get those awesome harmonic distortions at
> around 22khz :)

You know, the audibility of higher harmonic distionproducts - those are the
annoying ones - of a 22 kHz tone are not all that audible, not even to cats
or bats.

In terms of calculation precision what matters is using 32 or more bits pr.
dataword, because that is how to push the rounding errors to insignificance,
another strong strategy is to minimize the number of consecutive math
operations, something that is very much a workflow optimization issue.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Arny Krueger]

"siguy" > wrote in message
...

Another good reason for rec'ing at a higher sample/bit rate (as if there
weren't enough already) is that you can then apply fx and mastering tools to
the higher rate data, while this may not seem important, it does allow for a
much higher precision of calculation of effects such as reverb and
distortion, this way you don't get nasty rounding errors creeping into the
noticeable left bits of the samples, you also don't get those awesome
harmonic distortions at around 22khz :)

I think that several different audible and inaudible effects are conflated
above.

I think that the most important effect of choosing a too-low sample
frequency is that nolinear distortion in the digital domain tends to create
spurious responses that reflect down from the Nyquist frequency rather than
continue up to higher and higher frequencies, as they typically do in the
analog domain. As was correctly pointed out, this is either a good or a bad
thing depending on your expectations.

The liklihood that rounding errors in 16 bit arithmetic will have audible
effects after a typical number of calculations is a different question.

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

siguy wrote:
> Another good reason for rec'ing at a higher sample/bit rate (as if there weren't enough already) is that you can then
> apply fx and mastering tools to the higher rate data,

That's all 32 bit float. Some are even 64 bit float ( not that it matters ).

> while this may not seem important, it does allow for a much higher
> precision of calculation of effects such as reverb and distortion,

Talking about precision and distortion or reverb in the same sentence
is ... bizarre :)

> this way you don't get nasty rounding errors creeping into
> the noticeable left bits of the samples,

If you simply DFT, then IDFT a 32 bit float audio signal, you'll get
errors that would be significant for the least significant bit for
a 16 bit stream.

> you alsodon't get those awesome harmonic distortions at
> around 22khz :)

Odd, I simply don't see those... and nobody can hear them.

"All recordings are bad. Only live music is any good" - Scott
Dorsey.

--
Les Cargill

[Trevor]

"siguy" > wrote in message
...
>Another good reason for rec'ing at a higher sample/bit rate (as if there
>weren't enough already) is that you can then apply fx and mastering >tools
>to the higher rate data, while this may not seem important, it does allow
>for a much higher precision of calculation of effects such as >reverb and
>distortion, this way you don't get nasty rounding errors creeping into the
>noticeable left bits of the samples,

This is not a reason to RECORD at higher sample/bit rates. It is a reason to
EDIT at higher sample/bit/data sizes. There is a significant difference,
although maybe not as critical in practice now as it once was.

Trevor.