3 ms·
That's true but sampling beyond your target domain bounds seems pointless, right? If, say, you're sampling audio oversampling will just give you a bunch of freq
by voidhorse 4y ago
That's true but sampling beyond your target domain bounds seems pointless, right? If, say, you're sampling audio oversampling will just give you a bunch of frequencies you'd end up throwing away regardless. It's extra work for no benefit if the domain already has well-prescribed bounds.
I guess it could be useful in cases where you don't have bounds to work against.
This comes back to the poor writing, though, as I believe the author meant to indicate that the industry standard for sampling audio is 10x their cited sampling rate of 2000HZ in the text (though this is incorrect, too. Audio is sampled at 44100HZ because the general upper bound on hearing is 22000HZ, so by Nyquist's theorem, sampling at 44100 gives you enough range to avoid aliasing within the 0-22000 band).
- GianIsAlive 4y agoThis is a way better explaination. Thank you! I do agree my writing could be better.
- fsckboy 4y agoHere's what I've never understood, isn't Nyquist sampling discrete in time but continuous in amplitude? If the amplitude is instead (as is normal in digital) being sampled discretely (in steps), wouldn't that introduce errors, and wouldn't more samples make up for these errors? what would Nyquist in amplitude, continuous in time look like? that's sort of a class D amplifier, and even sort of CVSD.
- ajb 4y agoThere are Sigma Delta ADCs, which sample quantised to one bit at a higher frequency. They need to do some processing in the analogue domain though. IIRC you need to multiply the sample rate by 4*N to get the equivalent of an N but DAC