Winamp & Shoutcast Forums

Winamp & Shoutcast Forums (http://forums.winamp.com/index.php)
-   General Discussions (http://forums.winamp.com/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   how to play mp3 in 48000 kHz (http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?t=277465)

offi 17th September 2007 14:21

how to play mp3 in 48000 kHz
 
what have to do to play winamp mp3 in 48000 kHz??

Vie 17th September 2007 14:57

Record the MP3 file at 48kHz to begin with...

Mr Jones 17th September 2007 15:00

Lolz, Captain Obvious to the rescue :blah:

Vie 17th September 2007 15:05

Plus its 48kHz, ie 48000Hz, not 48000kHz isn't it?

sgtfuzzbubble011 17th September 2007 15:54

48khz = 24khz for both left and right channels, right? If so, why would you want to encode that high anyways? Nothing outside of professional studio audio equipment can reproduce frequencies that high. And even then, the human ear can't perceive sound in that range. Personally, I wouldn't waste the data bits on it.

SSJ4 Gogitta 17th September 2007 16:26

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
48khz = 24khz for both left and right channels, right? If so, why would you want to encode that high anyways? Nothing outside of professional studio audio equipment can reproduce frequencies that high. And even then, the human ear can't perceive sound in that range. Personally, I wouldn't waste the data bits on it.
Not to mention that normal audio CDs don't record their audio at 48 KHz, but at 44.1 KHz. Would be pointless to up-sample the CD audio.

J_Darnley 17th September 2007 17:31

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
48khz = 24khz for both left and right channels, right? If so, why would you want to encode that high anyways? Nothing outside of professional studio audio equipment can reproduce frequencies that high. And even then, the human ear can't perceive sound in that range. Personally, I wouldn't waste the data bits on it.
No the sample rate is per channel not total. Anyway, the usual benefit for higher sample rates is better reproduction of lower frequencies.

I might not waste the bits on it either but if I get an audio file, I wouldn't resample it with an execption for hardware compatability.

MonKeyRum 17th September 2007 18:18

How many year old users with just a couple posts remember their username and password?

:D

Definitely an A for effort on that front!

ulillillia 20th September 2007 08:55

Are you sure it's 48,000 KHz (or 48 MHz)? That's sound quality so high that you'll only get about 4 seconds' worth of music on it (uncompressed). I think you mean 48 KHz which is 48,000 Hz. In that case, it should play on most any player (provided the converter encoded it to MP3 properly) since 48 KHz is a standard sample rate (used with DVD's I think). If this is from a CD, there's no sense in using 48 KHz for 3 reasons: upsampling is mainly just deteriorates the quality (slightly), it wastes disk space that could be used for more songs, and beyond 40,000 Hz sample rate is beyond the frequencies of human hearing. If you insist on using 48 KHz, you'll probably want at least a 144 Kbps CBR (or 96 Kbps for ABR) for MP3, given my formula.

Some cheap speakers can go beyond 20,000 Hz pitch. One of my old sets seemed to support up to 50,000 Hz pitch (the tweeter) where, beyond that, it started to sound very weird and distorted.

There are uses for very high sample rates though. When editting the tune in a WAV edittor like Audacity, there isn't as much loss due to rounding errors (one reason why 32-bit floating-point is used).

Edit: As a side note, for 48,000 KHz, you'd need a 144,000 Kbps bit rate (to get about CD quality) for MP3 which is still so high, you couldn't get 45 seconds on it. You'd be lucky to get 2 songs on a DVD-MP3 CD though.

Twilightseer 20th September 2007 10:58

I guess he meant 48000 Hz.

Vie's answer is the best.


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:15.

Copyright © 1999 - 2010 Nullsoft. All Rights Reserved.