What is the difference between 44100khz and 22000khz selection when encoding audio? Is that the peak audio frequency? Because I thought recievers and speakers go from 14khz to around 20000khz...?
Audio selection...
- Thread starter Philippine Mango
- Start date
YOyoYOhowsDAjello
Moderator<br>A/V & Home Theater<br>Elite member
- Aug 6, 2001
- 31,205
- 45
- 91
then, eh... I don't get it... So the response time of the headphones and the samples per second are different things? I thought they would be the same... It makes it appear that the headphones have poor response range topping out at 22000khz and not the 44100khz... Anybody clear this up for me? Do they even make 96khz headphones/speakers?
encoding rate != sound frequency.
for reasons that I won't bother to explain here, the highest sound frequency representable by a PCM digital signal is 1/2 the sample rate, hence for humans with a hearing range of 20-20,000 hz, the sample rate for cd audio was decided to be 44100 hz. there are also arguments for why even higher rates are desireable.
note that your numbers are missing a decimal point - 44.1 khz, not 44100 khz.
for reasons that I won't bother to explain here, the highest sound frequency representable by a PCM digital signal is 1/2 the sample rate, hence for humans with a hearing range of 20-20,000 hz, the sample rate for cd audio was decided to be 44100 hz. there are also arguments for why even higher rates are desireable.
note that your numbers are missing a decimal point - 44.1 khz, not 44100 khz.
speakers and headphones don't work on sample rates...they're analog, not digital. see my previous post.
YOyoYOhowsDAjello
Moderator<br>A/V & Home Theater<br>Elite member
- Aug 6, 2001
- 31,205
- 45
- 91
Like Dubb said, your decimal points aren't in the right spots. (or just say hz)
22000hz or 22khz is plenty for frequency response from headphones. There are some applications where people have supertweeters or ultratweeters that go well beyond 20khz, but anything in the upper teens in khz is going to be fine.
wouldn't that mean that
http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite/productspecs.asp?transid=005327
and this
http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite/productspecs.asp?transid=004195
sound the same if listening to a music CD?
No. All speakers/headphones sound different.
Ideally you would listen to them first to hear what you like.
Ideally you would listen to them first to hear what you like.
Ok time for an analogy.
Imagine that you live in the great state of Michigan and are driving to florida. I don't know what path you are going to take. Once every hour, you put a dot on a map for your current position until you get to your location.
Just for shits you decide to drive from Michigan to Florida a second time. This time you mark your position every 30 seconds.
On the first map, if you showed it to me afterwards, I would have an idea of the direction you drove in, but not necessarily the individual streets and roads you took. In the second map, I would have an almost perfect plot of your exact path, including any small side roads you took.
Think of higher sampling rates as the second map. You get more resolution of the original analog recording
If you are talking freq. response. This is basically the width of the region of frequencies with a certain tolerance that the speakers can produce.
So something could be 20-20,000hz +/- 3db
The same speaker could be 5-40,000hz +/- 12 db
The second stat is almost meaningless because if a signal is 12db is a very high tolerance
Imagine that you live in the great state of Michigan and are driving to florida. I don't know what path you are going to take. Once every hour, you put a dot on a map for your current position until you get to your location.
Just for shits you decide to drive from Michigan to Florida a second time. This time you mark your position every 30 seconds.
On the first map, if you showed it to me afterwards, I would have an idea of the direction you drove in, but not necessarily the individual streets and roads you took. In the second map, I would have an almost perfect plot of your exact path, including any small side roads you took.
Think of higher sampling rates as the second map. You get more resolution of the original analog recording
If you are talking freq. response. This is basically the width of the region of frequencies with a certain tolerance that the speakers can produce.
So something could be 20-20,000hz +/- 3db
The same speaker could be 5-40,000hz +/- 12 db
The second stat is almost meaningless because if a signal is 12db is a very high tolerance
YOyoYOhowsDAjello
Moderator<br>A/V & Home Theater<br>Elite member
- Aug 6, 2001
- 31,205
- 45
- 91
Let's try this:
Your computer runs on a frequency: Usually Mhz.
But you are not listening to it. (Well, maybe you are depending on your cooling, but that isn't what I mean.
)
The sample rate has NOTHING to do with the output sound frequencies, other than maybe clarity and quality.
If you have a audio clip that the sound ranges from 25hx to 19khz, no matter what sample rate you choose, the sound will always be 25hz to 19khz.
Your computer runs on a frequency: Usually Mhz.
But you are not listening to it. (Well, maybe you are depending on your cooling, but that isn't what I mean.
)The sample rate has NOTHING to do with the output sound frequencies, other than maybe clarity and quality.
If you have a audio clip that the sound ranges from 25hx to 19khz, no matter what sample rate you choose, the sound will always be 25hz to 19khz.
no. not necessarily.
its tough to fully explain this without getting fairly complicated, but frequency response ranges aren't the only thing that dictates how something like a pair of headphones sounds. Far from it actually. it's almost kind of a marketing tactic that they even publish that data. Open/closed design, materials, impedance... there's a long list of things that will affect how they sound.
for those headphones, I doubt you'd find anyone without hearing damage that would say they sound the same, even if you were listening to the same cd through the same DAC to the same amp, with levels adjusted to compensate for different nominal impedance.
in a quiet environment with a good amp the 580s will almost universally sound better.
Originally posted by: DOSfan
Let's try this:
Your computer runs on a frequency: Usually Mhz.
But you are not listening to it. (Well, maybe you are depending on your cooling, but that isn't what I mean.
The sample rate has NOTHING to do with the output sound frequencies, other than maybe clarity and quality.
If you have a audio clip that the sound ranges from 25hx to 19khz, no matter what sample rate you choose, the sound will always be 25hz to 19khz.
that's not true, see my first post above.
Damn. You are right.
I was confusing amplitude for sound frequency. :S
My fault for posting when I first wake up.
Ignore my previous post in this thread.
I was confusing amplitude for sound frequency. :S
My fault for posting when I first wake up.
Ignore my previous post in this thread.
Originally posted by: Dubb
Originally posted by: DOSfan
Let's try this:
Your computer runs on a frequency: Usually Mhz.
But you are not listening to it. (Well, maybe you are depending on your cooling, but that isn't what I mean.
The sample rate has NOTHING to do with the output sound frequencies, other than maybe clarity and quality.
If you have a audio clip that the sound ranges from 25hx to 19khz, no matter what sample rate you choose, the sound will always be 25hz to 19khz.
that's not true, see my first post above.
heh, damn nyquist guy.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
-
Facebook
Twitter