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.