personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - Mart

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - Busybusy 20:19:28 02/21/01 (62)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - Craig Luna 08:03:22 02/22/01 (1)

Correction - Craig Luna 08:04:33 02/22/01 (0)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - Wim 05:06:47 02/22/01 (8)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - Craig Luna 07:55:11 02/22/01 (7)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - Wim 15:38:28 02/22/01 (0)

There is energy, but no information above Fs/2 - Werner 08:48:30 02/22/01 (5)

Re: There is energy, but no information above Fs/2 - Craig Luna 11:15:31 02/22/01 (4)

Wrong, wrong :-) - Werner 12:20:55 02/22/01 (3)

Re: Wrong, wrong :-)-Are you so certain - Craig Luna 14:41:43 02/22/01 (2)

Re: Wrong, wrong :-)-Are you so certain Yes - Werner 02:39:03 02/23/01 (1)

If you think that - Craig Luna 09:53:27 02/23/01 (0)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - peter@thenephilim.net 23:38:47 02/21/01 (28)

a decent paper indeed - Werner 08:44:16 02/22/01 (27)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 14:13:47 02/22/01 (26)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Werner 02:44:13 02/23/01 (19)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 08:46:19 02/23/01 (18)

Re: a decent paper indeed - garth 09:58:37 02/26/01 (17)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 13:25:33 02/26/01 (16)

On a slightly more serious note... - Audio Fan 14:07:40 02/26/01 (0)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Audio Fan 14:03:11 02/26/01 (14)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 13:55:14 02/27/01 (12)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Audio Fan 09:35:53 02/28/01 (3)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 13:51:56 02/28/01 (2)

Thanks Dan. - Audio Fan 18:20:05 02/28/01 (1)

Re: Thanks Dan. - Daniel Espley 02:54:46 03/1/01 (0)

Re: a decent paper indeed - garth 03:40:07 02/28/01 (3)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 13:32:10 02/28/01 (2)

Re: a decent paper indeed - garth 03:19:45 03/1/01 (1)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Audio Fan 11:00:55 03/1/01 (0)

Re: a decent paper indeed - -Steve 15:10:28 02/27/01 (3)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Audio Fan 18:23:02 02/28/01 (1)

Re: a decent paper indeed - -Steve 18:30:56 02/28/01 (0)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 15:39:05 02/27/01 (0)

How true! - -Steve 12:47:32 02/27/01 (0)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Dave I 14:46:11 02/22/01 (5)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 08:55:08 02/23/01 (3)

Re: a decent paper indeed - -Steve 12:43:07 02/23/01 (2)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Daniel Espley 03:19:42 02/24/01 (1)

Re: a decent paper indeed - Audio Fan 09:17:19 02/24/01 (0)

Re: a decent paper indeed - -Steve 18:16:07 02/22/01 (0)

personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - Mart 02/21/0123:06:41 02/21/01 (14)

Re: personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - garth 07:47:01 02/23/01 (0)

Re: personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - Rodney Gold 23:46:54 02/21/01 (12)

Re: personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - Daniel Espley 03:07:50 02/22/01 (0)

44.1 isn't compatible with 96 - Mart 00:27:43 02/22/01 (10)

Re: 44.1 isn't compatible with 96 - Rodney Gold 02:45:42 02/22/01 (9)

Re: 44.1 isn't compatible with 96 - garth 08:21:25 02/25/01 (0)

Re: 44.1 isn't compatible with 96 - Craig Luna 11:25:59 02/22/01 (0)

it does. - Werner 07:02:36 02/22/01 (4)

Perhaps I'm not being clear here - Rodney Gold 08:35:24 02/22/01 (3)

so, now you're right :-) - Werner 08:42:19 02/22/01 (2)

Bullseye.... - -Steve 18:24:38 02/22/01 (1)

It's all in the algorythm - Mart 22:09:23 02/22/01 (0)

it is much more complex than that, but 10 & 20 should still exist - Mart 03:26:38 02/22/01 (0)

So what's inserted according to you then ? nt - rbroer 03:17:34 02/22/01 (0)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - pushpulltriode 22:48:50 02/21/01 (6)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - Busybusy 15:37:32 02/22/01 (5)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - pushpulltriode 21:57:58 02/22/01 (4)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - garth 05:47:33 02/25/01 (3)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - pushpulltriode 07:47:39 02/25/01 (2)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - garth 08:12:57 02/25/01 (1)

Re: Upsampling shifts energy to higher frequency ? - pushpulltriode 08:25:43 02/25/01 (0)

Follow Ups

personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - Mart 02/21/0123:06:41 02/21/01 (14)

Re: personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - garth 07:47:01 02/23/01 (0)

Re: personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - Rodney Gold 23:46:54 02/21/01 (12)

Re: personally, I'm waiting for a Fourier based upsampler to 88.2kHz - Daniel Espley 03:07:50 02/22/01 (0)

44.1 isn't compatible with 96 - Mart 00:27:43 02/22/01 (10)

Re: 44.1 isn't compatible with 96 - Rodney Gold 02:45:42 02/22/01 (9)

Re: 44.1 isn't compatible with 96 - garth 08:21:25 02/25/01 (0)

Re: 44.1 isn't compatible with 96 - Craig Luna 11:25:59 02/22/01 (0)

it does. - Werner 07:02:36 02/22/01 (4)

Perhaps I'm not being clear here - Rodney Gold 08:35:24 02/22/01 (3)

so, now you're right :-) - Werner 08:42:19 02/22/01 (2)

Bullseye.... - -Steve 18:24:38 02/22/01 (1)

It's all in the algorythm - Mart 22:09:23 02/22/01 (0)

it is much more complex than that, but 10 & 20 should still exist - Mart 03:26:38 02/22/01 (0)

So what's inserted according to you then ? nt - rbroer 03:17:34 02/22/01 (0)