Re: PC sound cards (Dan Freed )

Subject: Re: PC sound cards
From:    Dan Freed  <dfreed(at)HEI.ORG>
Date:    Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:14:00 -0800

Sampling rate conversion isn't just "correct" or "incorrect"; there's a continuum of quality. Perfect resampling requires infinitely long filters with infinite wordlengths, so all real-world resamplers involve compromises between quality and resources. Some resampling algorithms do a better job when the rate conversion ratio is a small-integer ratio, but other algorithms work equally well for arbitrary ratios. -- Dan Freed -----Original Message----- From: AUDITORY Research in Auditory Perception [mailto:AUDITORY(at)LISTS.MCGILL.CA]On Behalf Of Pallier Christophe Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 1:00 AM To: AUDITORY(at)LISTS.MCGILL.CA Subject: Re: PC sound cards On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, David Isherwood wrote: > The main problem with such soundcards is that ALL internal processing > is done at a sampling rate of 48kHz, which means that any audio stream > having a different sampling rate than this must be upsampled at the i/p > buss and downsampled at the o/p. The quality of this onboard sample rate > conversion can vary greatly from card to card with some soundcards > producing very noticeable artifacts. > Am I correct in believing that this implies that I should better work with sampling rates that are integer dividers of 48 Khz (e.g. 16 Khz rather than, say, 22050 Hz)? I hope all sample rate conversion algorithms should be able to correctly oversample by an integer (?) Christophe Pallier

This message came from the mail archive
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University