In Reply to: Misinformation posted by audioengr on March 6, 2012 at 17:12:04:
Unless there's evidence to show that we need to accurately reproduce > 20kHz, I remember speaking to an engineer friend recently who insists that 50kHz sampling rate is more than adequate to allow essentially perfect reproduction to 20kHz with a bit of leeway given for imperfect filters in an imperfect world.
As for dynamic range, 21-bits is all we really need on the reproduction side since that's the limits of the best DAC's and I doubt many ADC's are capable of any better. Realistically, most music barely even gets close to 16-bit dynamic range anyways.
From my discussions with this friend then 24/50 (let's round up that 21-bits) is enough to capture everything. From my listening experience with hi-res files doing transcoding and conversions over the years, I have no reason to doubt this.
As an aside, I find it amazing that we audiophiles argue about DAC's so much that we barely talk about the ADC side and the miles of comparatively "nonaudiophile" cables, and relatively cheap jitter-prone 'pro' equipment used to capture the performance in the first place! I presume it's just because we have no control over that other side and the manufacturers also have nothing to sell us.
I wonder if anyone has looked at something like jitter issues between capturing audio at 24/96 vs. 24/192] on the equipment out there. I suspect issues like that would have more bearing on what we hear than stuff we tend to obsess over like which coaxial digital cable is better :-)
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- What is good enough? - Archimago 03/6/1222:11:25 03/6/12 (15)
- "Need" is not to be confused with "Want". - Tony Lauck 12:59:30 03/7/12 (3)
- I agree... But... RE: "Need" is not to be confused with "Want". - Archimago 21:28:22 03/7/12 (2)
- RE: I agree... But... RE: "Need" is not to be confused with "Want". - Adriel 21:45:35 03/8/12 (1)
- Disagree... - Archimago 17:33:23 03/9/12 (0)
- RE: What is good enough? - audioengr 11:21:57 03/7/12 (0)
- RE: What is good enough? - lokie 05:09:28 03/7/12 (1)
- RE: What is good enough? - b.l.zeebub 11:40:57 03/7/12 (0)
- RE: What is good enough? - Adriel 22:22:54 03/6/12 (7)
- RE: What is good enough? - b.l.zeebub 02:27:30 03/7/12 (4)
- RE: What is good enough? - Tony Lauck 13:16:50 03/7/12 (2)
- RE: What is good enough? - b.l.zeebub 14:40:06 03/7/12 (1)
- RE: What is good enough? - Tony Lauck 14:57:55 03/7/12 (0)
- I agree (nt) - audioengr 11:23:17 03/7/12 (0)
- RE: What is good enough? - Archimago 22:24:21 03/6/12 (1)
- RE: What is good enough? - Adriel 22:08:27 03/7/12 (0)