Re: Is 44.1 KHz sample-rate enough? Yes and No.

"Green Xenon [Radium]" <glucegen1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
message news:480678c5$0$7049$4c368faf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> No:
>
> http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4743184

"ANSWER: If you ever have the op****tunity to come across a true audio
buff, 
especially one who prefers vinyl to CD, when a cartridge, tonearm and 
transcription turntable are of performance quality, you will hear
something 
about harmonics that reinforce the fundamental frequencies. Myself
included 
there are people with trained ears or a gift of perfect pitch that can 
easily hear those differences. In truth the sonority is felt even by the 
layman when it's A/B'd. Even though Lucas has a claim to fame, since the 
first Star Wars film, of mandating that THX become the standard for which 
all sound reproduction must surpass any vinyl known to man, it was also 
adopted by the audio industries golden ears. There truly is a difference, 
but it cannot be appreciated unless the recording is pristine because it 
will bring out imperfections as well. You are not going to hear it unless 
all of the audio equipment in the chain can reproduce the dynamics and 
frequencies. 44.1 is far from being a perfect sampling rate. Contained in
it 
are LSB's which are truncated lost ambient information. That information 
adds warmth to a CD. SACD is a fine attempt at processing a CD to get a 
little closer to 24/192 but it's only 20bit technology and is still like a

4x3 video image being stretched using processing to fit a 16x9 display.

"Some of us do hear like dogs & bats. Go into a true listening room with a

fine Telarc recording and be prepared to be blown out of your seat. The 
average to really good sound systems that are marketed in the states will 
not show you the benefits. You'll hear it more often in Japan.

"I am an associate of Mark Levinson. Now he's a guru!

Summary - it is true because I say it is true.

> http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742942

"The higher the sampling rate the more accurate the reproduction.  The
human 
ear is an analog receiver.  While most modern music is less effected by
the 
sampling rate, if you were to listen to classical music, you would hear
the 
difference.  The higher sampling rate will reproduce what is called the 
"warmth" of the music.  This is a hard thing to describe, but it does
exist. 
Hard core classical enthusiasts will agree, that vinyl records provide a 
more accurate reproduction of actual performances than CDs.  Records are 
analog recordings.  Interestingly enough, many recording studios still 
record in analog to tape before processing digitally...

Summary - an analog bigot.

> Yes:
>
> http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742938

Answer is so stupid as to be embarassing.

> I am confused as to who is right and who is wrong.

They are *all* wrong.

> So I ask in this group as well. Is a 44.1 kHz sample rate
> sufficient to cover the entire human hearing range?

Yes, because this has been investigated scientifically many different
ways, 
and removing all sound above 20 KHz generally makes no difference with 
recordings of music, dialog, and almost all sound effects.