RE: Table of Sample Rate vs Quality and note on Nyquist theorem.

Christopher Chapman wrote,

>Now for my own note:

>Given that 20000 Hz seems to be the upper limit of human hearing
>(apparently even 16000 Hz is the upper limit for a lot of people) and
>since Nyquist's sampling theorem tells us that the highest frequency
>which can be accurately represented is one-half of the sampling rate, it
>would seem that sample rates of 40000 Hz or greater should be sufficient
>to accurately represent all of the frequencies that we can hear.

Just because the highest frequency which can be accurately represented is
one-half the sampleing rate doesn't mean that all frequencies less than
one-half the sampling rate can be accurately represented.