CD quality to DVD quality audio
-
You mean this? When sampling a band-limited signal (e.g., converting from an analog signal to digital), the sampling frequency must be greater than twice the input signal bandwidth in order to be able to reconstruct the original perfectly from the sampled version.Originally posted by Mr Soh:The Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem showed that a sampled signal can be reproduced exactly, as long as it is sampled at a frequency greater than twice the bandwidth of the signal. Quantization, however, is not included in this theorem, and adds quantization noise, decreasing in level as the bit resolution increases. Also, in some cheaper systems, aliasing can become a problem, though this can be remedied by using steeper filters and oversampling.
It means, recreating the original perfect low quality audio. Understand? -
Originally posted by Ito_^:
He don't understand one.
You mean this? When sampling a band-limited signal (e.g., converting from an analog signal to digital), the sampling frequency must be greater than twice the input signal bandwidth in order to be able to reconstruct the original perfectly from the sampled version.
It means, recreating the original perfect [b]low quality audio. Understand?[/b]
CD Audio______vs__________DVD Audio
Sampling Rate
41.1kHz__________________192kHz
Samples Per Second
44,100___________ _______192,000
Sampling Accuracy
16-bit_____________ __________24-bit
Number of Possible Output Levels
65,536_________ ___________16,777,216 -
Originally posted by Ito_^:
Yes but u do with mp3, u get back the original signal which is Cd quality witht . In case u didnt knwow, CDs have a layer on the surface which produces a silky brand new sound when u first buy it as the layer degrades over time so does the sound. But oversampling may get back that effect i guess.
You mean this? When sampling a band-limited signal (e.g., converting from an analog signal to digital), the sampling frequency must be greater than twice the input signal bandwidth in order to be able to reconstruct the original perfectly from the sampled version.
It means, recreating the original perfect [b]low quality audio. Understand?[/b] -
We r talking about Digital to digital manipulation, not from analog sources to digital. I provided an analogy for the tape thing
-
I only know you go to audiophile forum. Confirm kanna flame as Noob.
-
signal is signal.. i got A for my data comm modules hor.Originally posted by Mr Soh:We r talking about Digital to digital manipulation, not from analog sources to digital. I provided an analogy for the tape thing
-
good. now you admit it will never be DVD quality. dats a good step, now to get u admit it will never be CD quality.Originally posted by Mr Soh:Yes but u do with mp3, u get back the original signal which is Cd quality witht . In case u didnt knwow, CDs have a layer on the surface which produces a silky brand new sound when u first buy it as the layer degrades over time so does the sound. But oversampling may get back that effect i guess. -
If my ears are only this good, and the sound is that fantastic, how do I tell?
-
i think at 192kbs 44.1Khz is oredi good enuf
i cant really tell the diff between 192 and 256kbs and the original CD -
160 for me, good nuff. the rest jiu kau hardware le.Originally posted by abao:i think at 192kbs 44.1Khz is oredi good enuf
i cant really tell the diff between 192 and 256kbs and the original CD -
by the way, you shouldn't be messing around with mp3, which is compressed audio format. shouldn't you be messing around with uncompressed wave files? and converting from mp3 to mp3, no matter what bitrate or quality you converting to, will still reduce the quality
