Re: What's the use of a 192 kHz sample rate?

Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtri@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article <481becfe$0$5141$4c368faf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>  "Green Xenon [Radium]" <glucegen1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> > Hi:
> > 
> > Why does DVD-Audio use 192 kHz sample rate? What's the advantage over 
> > 44.1 kHz? Humans can't hear the full range of a 192 kHz sample rate?
> > 
> > On average, what is the minimum sample rate for a guy in his early to 
> > mid 20s who likes treble?
> > 
> > I agree there are a small percentage of humans who can hear above 20 
> > kHz. However, DVD-audio uses a sample-rate of 192 kHz which allows a 
> > maximum frequency of 96 kHz. There is no known case of any human being

> > able to hear sounds nearly as high as 96 kHz. I can agree with 48 kHz 
> > sample rate and even 96 kHz sample-rate [maybe], but 192 kHz is just
stupid.
> > 
> > So whats the justification fur using 192 kHz? If you ask me, its just
a 
> > total waste of bandwidth and energy. Any proof to the contrary?
> > 
> > Please correct me if I'm wrong but AFAIK, its a waste of time, money, 
> > energy to move to 192 kHz.
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Radium

> Oversampling reduces losses during editing. 


I think you're confusing higher SR  with higher bit-depth.

> 192KHz could be the 
> studio's native format.

One would wonder why, there as well.



-- 
-S 
maybe they wanna rock.
maybe they need to rock.
Maybe it's for the money?  But That's none of our business..our business
as fans is to rock 
with them.