1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Resampling explained

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by xnor, Dec 10, 2012.
First
 
Back
1 2 3
  1. bigshot
    That just depends on how you think about it. If it feels better to have sound quality you can't hear, then perhaps -180dB would make you feel even better. Or -200dB. At some point I would think you would have to say to yourself, "OK this is enough." Or perhaps it just keeps going forever.
     
    For me, I find it's better to concern myself with sound quality I can hear and not worry about what I can't.
     
  2. RRod
     
    Especially given that re-sampling isn't something you're going to be doing umpteen times during mastering.
     
  3. jacobacci
     
    It's not resampling during mastering I was referring to, but resampling that the Sony Xperia Z3 does whenever it plays back audio.
     
     
     
    Quote:
     
    At an objective level you are absolutely right, I shouldn't care about something that goes on below -100db. To me it's more a question of principle. Why should the second best algorithm (non integer ratio resampling) be used if there is a better one (integer ratio resampling) that does not cost more or use more (in fact it uses less) resources.
     
  4. RRod
     
    Same point, though: it's a one-shot algorithm. Take song, resample, done. Not something to sweat so much between -120 and -140dB. But yes, there's no reason not to use a better real-time resampling algorithm if it doesn't bog down your resources.
     
First
 
Back
1 2 3

Share This Page