@ atdavid
So when I finally had some time ( it’s been a very busy week ) went off and did some sleuthing and reading. Anyways, to cut to the chase....found the following.....
It proves you can infer some time details beyond the sample rate, but this is practicaly a kind of limited exception to the rule implied by the sampling rate -not an escape from accuracy limitations.
It was shown that the phase of a sinusoidal pattern which is assumed as perfect and constant can be resolved to a fraction of the sampling interval.
This subsample accuracy was possible because the pattern recorded is not a discrete event, it’s impression is recorded throughout many consecutive samples and its exact formation is inferable (idealy).
For all discrete or unassumable events, PCM records can only specify time of occurence to within a whole length of the sampling interval. Time resolution can only be improved when a known pattern can be observed throughout multiple samples -which is the case for computing the phase of synthetic frequency components, but not at all when trying to refine the temporal location of unassumed events.
This seems to say that timing beyond the sampling rate is a rather special case that works in situations that have a long term term steady state input, and doesn’t apply to " discrete or unassumable "events. And correct me if I’m wrong but music is most likely something very akin to a discrete or unassumable events, eh.
That proved kinda interesting and sorta relevant so I decided to look at the articles you posted to back-fill your position, and not just go, ooooh, that right there is real honest sound and robust science, and just run away cause people like us are afraid of the dark and real science.
So looked thru those articles and sure enough timing beyond the sample rate is indeed possible.....in gas pipelines, which I assume are fairly steady state noise sources.....and not as one articles clearly states....
Notuseful for real-time applications. The whole signal needs to be known in advance.
Where the real-time applications kinda sorta sounds an awful lot like music....and the whole signal implies long term steady state.
So colour me confused....but it seems the articles you posted may be sound and robust science but the bottom line they don’t really support your contentions....if fact in one case quite the opposite and in the other case concerned with something not at all like music and from a strictly sound and robust science perceptive has very limited relevance .
That being said would be happy to learn more about this so please post other references, though if I were you I may want to actually read the article before posting, you know, just to make sure it says what you hope it does.