Talk:44,100 Hz

Old discussion

In addition to the references, see the discussion at Talk:Compact disc/Archive 1#sampling frequency for prior discussion on this topic.

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 08:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

441 lines

An old edit at PCM adaptor claims that the 44.1 kHz rate is related to the old German 441 lines system, writing:

It is quite interesting to see that the number 44.100 has its roots back in the old German TV system from the 1940s, which used 441 lines at 50 Hz field frequency, resulting in a line frequency of 11.025 kHz, which is exactly 1/4 of the sampling frequency used in Audio CDs today.

This appears to be a coincidence – from what I can tell, there is no such relation (44.1 kHz was based on NTSC and PAL video, with 441 lines standard being long-dead). In principle there may have been existing oscillators at this frequency, but that seems very speculative – it seems simply a coincidence.

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 08:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

It would be very strange to fit a new format in the 1980's to a long deceased video format from the 1940's indeed. Aszazin (talk) 18:50, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Excessive Citations Required?

The following statement is more likely assumed due to well known past acts and the tactics of copyright protection schemes, and are likely well documented within Wikipedia elsewhere.

"This difference was initially exploited to make it difficult to copy 44.1 kHz CDs using 48 kHz DAT equipment.[citation needed]"

Might be better to rephrase by including the word 'likely' instead of requiring further citation. Might also include parenthesis to provide possible clarification, rather than insinuate fact. "(This difference was likely initially exploited to make it difficult to copy 44.1 kHz CDs using 48 kHz DAT equipment.)"

This rephrasing would make the statement meet legal definitions. (After rereading my comment, a citation to "Digital Audio Tape: Anti-DAT lobbying" Wikipedia could easily be made, as during the 1980's copying was quite a proliferation by under aged children or those knowledgeable of law.)

It is well commonly seen from past acts, that the recording industry was involved in both legal and possibly illegal copyright protection prevention schemes and tactics for quiet sometime. Marketing also encourages the exploitation of such proprietary products or formats. Could reference this speculation further with the Commodore 1541 Wikipedia as to the lengths at which the recording industry will infringe on users, "The drive-head mechanism was notoriously easy to misalign. The most common cause of the 1541's drive head knocking and subsequent misalignment was copy protection schemes on commercial software." I must admit though, kids will be kids, and kids will think it's cool to copy without realizing the strain it puts on the economic system as it's just a few dollars.

Bottom line, it would not be illegal to manufacture more expensive equipment which provided capabilities beyond what a normal user needs, and is a very common and successful marketing tactic!

This "44,100 Hz" article, was a good read alongside the "Sampling (signal processing)" article! --roger (talk) 17:37, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

2.05 kHz transition band?

Shouldn't a transition band for a (lowpass) filter be expressed in octaves, rather than in Hertz? 2050 Hz is a huge 8 octave transition band for a cutoff point at 256 Hz, but an utter small one for a cutoff point at 20,000 Hz. Aszazin (talk) 18:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Maybe parenthetically but readers can easily see where 2.05 kHz comes from ((44.1/2)-20). Not so easy to see when expressed relative to the cutoff frequency. Also Transition band doesn't talk directly about how this is specified but what it does talk about is in units of Hz. ~Kvng (talk) 17:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)