The maximum frequency a 27420Hz sampling rate can achieve is approx. 13.5KHz, half the sampling rate. And that would be one hell of a crappy square looking 13.5KHz wave. This is why the higher the sampling frequency is, the better more accurate representation, even way way beyond double audiable range. 192KHz is nice, but sampling frequencies in MHz ranges would be even better at correctly capturing the high end audiable frequencies and harmonics which just aren't represented at all in todays digital world of crap sound.
Makes me glad I have my Tascam reel to reel mastering machine and a decent vinyl collection.
While most people can't hear anything over 21 KHz , we are perfectly capable of telling different waveforms apart, even at high frequencies. That's where high sample rates come in.
Problem is that 192 KHz sometimes allow distortion, as the resolution is so high it allows other frequencies to "merge" - kinda like aural moiré patterns. There's a few tests that imply that the optimal sample rate for human ears would be around 70-80 KHz.
Regardless, I'm getting older, and seems to be capped at 44 KHz. When I was younger I was able to tell 44.1 from 48 KHz. Now, I can barely hear the difference between 48 and 32. -.-
Anyway, to get back to the topic: 27 KHz at 16-bit resolution means a transfer speed of at least 54 Kbps. Can the clock port handle that much when the CPU needs cycles to feed it with data?
