🚀 go-pugleaf

In <16150@csli.Stanford.EDU> poser@csli.Stanford.EDU (Bill Poser) writes:

>
>.... Here's how to do the calculation. Suppose you're
>going to use one byte per sample. That gives you passable resolution,
>though not what you'd want for research or real hi-fi. It's also the
>resolution of all of the cheap digitizers. To get good quality speech
>you should sample at a minimum of 12K samples/second. This gives you
>room for anti-aliasing filtering at about 5KHz (you need to allow
>for the fact that the filter cutoff is not perfectly sharp). So,
>you need 12K bytes per second. That is 1.2e4 * 3.6e3 = 4.32e7
>bytes per hour, or 43.2MB per hour. So you need another half an order
>of magnitude to get into the ballpark.
Your figure is a *little* off -- a K is 1024, not 1,000.  (Computers
are so dumb they have to count on their fingers -- both of them.)  But
I take your point -- casual digital recording would seem to be beyond
the current generation of computer media, and probably the next as
well!  And by the time 43 meg mass storage has joined 64K RAM in the
netherworld of "used to think that was a *lot*", we'll have more
interesting problems -- or more drastic ones.
-- 

ergo@netcom.uucp			Isaac Rabinovitch
netcom!ergo@apple.com			Silicon Valley, CA
{apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!ergo

WISE SAYING NEEDED.  Must reflect positive human values.  Gentle humor a
...  
Hey, it was a JOKE!