I realized after I sent it off that I had conflated the two concepts.
My apologies for playing too fast and loose.
On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 01:51 PM, Goran Finnberg wrote:
> Aaron Luis Levinson wrote:
>> that things like "time compression and expansion functions" are almost
>> never employed in modern sessions because despite what the math may
>> indicate there are very ugly and noticeable artifacts that emerge from
> Time twist which is one of the names used for this type of operation ie
> changing the pitch without changing the tempo can be quite audible
> it´s difficult to find good splice points to give an unbroken flow of
> Varispeed on the other hand is exactly akin to changing the speed of
> motor driving the turntable which will change both tempo and pitch
> is exactly the errors we have on the original recording.
> In a digital system we do varispeed by changing the system clock to
> increase or decrease the speed.
> This is called sample rate conversion and is in the better software and
> freestanding boxes a completely transparent operation in my experience.
>> This immediately produces more "grain" because now half the number of
>> samples are being used
>> to replicate the same sound.
> You´ve gone from 16 bits to 8 bits quantization.
> But the sampling frequency is unchanged in your example.
>> However unless I am radically mistaken this
>> down-sampling did not shorten (or extend )the sample from a time
> Right, since you´ve changed the bit depth and the sampling rate is
> totally unchanged.
> You´re mixing two totally different concepts, sampling frequency with
> the number of bits used to describe the samples.
> Goran Finnberg
> The Mastering Room AB
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough to
> make them all yourself. - John Luther