Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 v7 ucbtopaz-1.8; site ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!ucbtopaz!newton2 From: newton2@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: CD Reflections Message-ID: <639@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA> Date: Mon, 14-Jan-85 02:54:31 EST Article-I.D.: ucbtopaz.639 Posted: Mon Jan 14 02:54:31 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jan-85 04:34:06 EST References: <15100001@hpfcmp.UUCP> Organization: Univ. of Calif., Berkeley CA USA Lines: 16 You do *not* need a 3X sample rate to capture a 1X signal. If you sample at "40 kHz" (as you say), you can capture every frequency (sinewave or whatever) *less than* 20 kHz. For every signal *less than* 20 kHz, a little thought will confirm that a 40 kHz equipartition cannot fall only on zero crossings. Actually, I take back the "or whatever" in the paragraph above. The sampling theorem isn't really up for debate, is it? Or should we leave it to the same folks who reveal truth about creationism and other subjects so subjective they need to be rescued from the "dogma" of science. Please excuse this intemperate flame, but it troubles me to see elementary stuff so poorly disseminated and understood on a medium steeped in high technology.