They say no: http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4743184 http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742942 They say Yes: http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742938 I am confused as to who is right and who is wrong. So I ask in this group as well. Is a 44.1 kHz sample rate sufficient to cover the entire human hearing range? I am the "Green" guy who asked questions on Allexperts.com Regards, Radium
Is 44.1 KHz sample-rate enough to cover the entire human hearing range?
Started by ●May 2, 2008
Reply by ●May 2, 20082008-05-02
Is 44.1 KHz enough? It depends on how you define "hear", who (how old) is doing the "hearing", and how good a set of anti-aliasing filters (input and output) you can get for your budget limitations. If you do a mediocre job of filtering the DAC outputs, or do PET/NMRI scans of the brains of young children to determine their response to sounds, you might find some measurable differences between 44.1 K and higher. If you do an excellent (read expensive) job of D/A conversion and reproduction, and score verbal responses from double blind testing on baby boomer aged adults, you might not even need 44.1 K to get statistically random responses from most of that population between that sample rate and higher. Or you might just ask to feed some domain specific flaming into a Turing test Eliza algorithm database. IMHO. YMMV.
Reply by ●May 2, 20082008-05-02
Ron N. wrote:> Is 44.1 KHz enough?Using the sampling rate of 44.1kHz, it is difficult to get the full analog response at 20kHz, which is important for the specmanship. For this reason, 48kHz is preferred. Vladimir Vassilevsky DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant http://www.abvolt.com
Reply by ●May 2, 20082008-05-02
Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:> > > Ron N. wrote: >>> Is 44.1 KHz enough?> > Using the sampling rate of 44.1kHz, it is difficult to get the full > analog response at 20kHz, which is important for the specmanship. For > this reason, 48kHz is preferred.Why does DVD-Audio use 192 kHz? What's the advantage over 44.1 kHz? Humans can't hear the full range of a 192 kHz sample rate?
Reply by ●May 2, 20082008-05-02
Ron N. wrote:> Is 44.1 KHz enough? It depends on how you define "hear", > who (how old) is doing the "hearing", and how good a set of > anti-aliasing filters (input and output) you can get for > your budget limitations. > > If you do a mediocre job of filtering the DAC outputs, or > do PET/NMRI scans of the brains of young children to determine > their response to sounds, you might find some measurable > differences between 44.1 K and higher. > > If you do an excellent (read expensive) job of D/A conversion > and reproduction, and score verbal responses from double blind > testing on baby boomer aged adults, you might not even need > 44.1 K to get statistically random responses from most of that > population between that sample rate and higher. > > Or you might just ask to feed some domain specific flaming > into a Turing test Eliza algorithm database. > > > IMHO. YMMV.On average, what is the minimum sample rate for a guy in his early to mid 20s who likes treble?
Reply by ●May 3, 20082008-05-03
Vladimir Vassilevsky <antispam_bogus@hotmail.com> writes:> Ron N. wrote: > >> Is 44.1 KHz enough? > > Using the sampling rate of 44.1kHz, it is difficult to get the full > analog response at 20kHz,Vlad, I'm surprised. You can always bump the sample rate of the ADC way up, allow 20+ kHz in the front-end, and then do a really nice decimator. I.e., 44.1 kHz doesn't have to be the A/D rate, just the medium's Fs. -- % Randy Yates % "Remember the good old 1980's, when %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % things were so uncomplicated?" %%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon' %%%% <yates@ieee.org> % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●May 3, 20082008-05-03
Vladimir Vassilevsky <antispam_bogus@hotmail.com> writes:> Ron N. wrote: > >> Is 44.1 KHz enough? > > Using the sampling rate of 44.1kHz, it is difficult to get the full > analog response at 20kHz,Vlad, I'm surprised. You can always bump the sample rate of the ADC way up, allow 20+ kHz in the front-end, and then do a really nice decimator. I.e., 44.1 kHz doesn't have to be the A/D rate, just the medium's Fs. -- % Randy Yates % "Remember the good old 1980's, when %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % things were so uncomplicated?" %%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon' %%%% <yates@ieee.org> % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●May 3, 20082008-05-03
"Green Xenon [Radium]" <glucegen1@excite.com> writes:> They say no: > > http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4743184 > > http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742942 > > They say Yes: > > http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742938 > > I am confused as to who is right and who is wrong. So I ask in this > group as well. Is a 44.1 kHz sample rate sufficient to cover the > entire human hearing range? > > I am the "Green" guy who asked questions on Allexperts.com > > > Regards, > > RadiumRadium, Think of a similar question as follows. We currently build residential rooms in the US to a height of 8 feet. Does that mean that all humans will fit? We already know the answer is no. Robert Wadlow grew to a height of 8 feet 11 inches back in the first half of the last century. A similar result holds for 44.1 kHz audio. There will always be some relatively small percentage of humans with hearing that surpasses 20 kHz. Is this common? I don't think so. Sorry I don't have any official statistics for you, but regardless of the exact numbers, the idea is the same: there will always statistically be a chance a human will hear past the upper end of just about any sample rate. -- % Randy Yates % "And all that I can do %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % is say I'm sorry, %%% 919-577-9882 % that's the way it goes..." %%%% <yates@ieee.org> % Getting To The Point', *Balance of Power*, ELO http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●May 3, 20082008-05-03
Randy Yates wrote:> "Green Xenon [Radium]" <glucegen1@excite.com> writes: > >> They say no: >> >> http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4743184 >> >> http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742942 >> >> They say Yes: >> >> http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742938 >> >> I am confused as to who is right and who is wrong. So I ask in this >> group as well. Is a 44.1 kHz sample rate sufficient to cover the >> entire human hearing range? >> >> I am the "Green" guy who asked questions on Allexperts.com >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Radium > > Radium, > > Think of a similar question as follows. > > We currently build residential rooms in the US to a height of 8 > feet. Does that mean that all humans will fit? We already know the > answer is no. Robert Wadlow grew to a height of 8 feet 11 inches back in > the first half of the last century. > > A similar result holds for 44.1 kHz audio. There will always be some > relatively small percentage of humans with hearing that surpasses 20 > kHz. Is this common? I don't think so. Sorry I don't have any official > statistics for you, but regardless of the exact numbers, the idea is the > same: there will always statistically be a chance a human will hear past > the upper end of just about any sample rate.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. 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?
Reply by ●May 3, 20082008-05-03
Green Xenon [Radium] wrote:> They say no: > > http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4743184 > > http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742942 > > They say Yes: > > http://www.allexperts.com/user.cgi?m=6&catID=835&qID=4742938 > > I am confused as to who is right and who is wrong. So I ask in this > group as well. Is a 44.1 kHz sample rate sufficient to cover the entire > human hearing range? > > I am the "Green" guy who asked questions on Allexperts.com44.1/2=22.05 KHz, the maximum possible frequency that can be reproduced according to simpleminded theory. 19 KHz is closer to the practical limit. A few humans can hear frequencies higher than that, so the answer must be no. It is sufficiently high to exceed the hearing limits of almost all adults. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
