What's the point of higher sampling rates in audio?, Such as 96 and 192kHz. Options

[stranhoROX]

Could someone explain to me why there are some recordings with sample rates as high as 192kHz? If most of us hear up to 20kHz, wouldn't 44.1kHz or even 48kHz be enough? Or is there other practical aspects besides boosting maximum frequency in higher sampling rates I am not aware of?

[pappaapa]

Question:

Shouldn't the rest of the worlds acoustics be considered as well?
I mean, non audible frequencies pass through materials and become audible. So they need to be there if you want a natural sound reproduction.
It's not just our eardrums in the room, is it?

To make a comparison with light:
Your day at the office would be pretty dark if you were to take the non visible part of the spectra out of the equation.
As the flourecent lights fully depends on ultraviolet light, a higher frequency light just outside the visible spectra.

NOTE: I'm a musician and an audiophile, not a scientist. So I could be horribly wrong.
And maybe this has been said a million times before.
But to me it feels pretty obvious.

You should start to slow the soundwaves down right at the speaker covers.

/Levi

[krabapple]

Question:

Shouldn't the rest of the worlds acoustics be considered as well?
I mean, non audible frequencies pass through materials and become audible.

No, that's distortion.