Re: The Emperor's New Sample Rate

On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 15:20:03 -0700, Steven Sullivan wrote
(in article <fte6mj02301@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):

> awareness that 'hi rez' is a solution looking for a problem, seems to
> be growing...
> 
> From the online April issue of MIX magazine
> 
>
http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/audio_emperors_new_sampling/index.html
> 

Thanks for the link. My own experience - on the recording end- is similar
WRT 
sampling rates. Although I find it easier to record in 32-bit floating
than 
in 16-bit (more headroom), I found that 96KHz vs 44.1 yielded nothing but 
larger files with no discernible audible improvements at all. I have a
number 
of rehearsal sessions where I switch sample rates between 44./96 KHz and 
bit-depths (32-bit float, 24, 20, 16). And I can assure you that I cannot 
tell the difference in any way between 96KH and 44.1 played directly out
of 
the laptop I used as a recorder through an Apogee Duet A/D-D/A.

Of course, this type of experimentation is for my own personal edification

and experience only because irrespective of how I master these sessions,
the 
orchestra, wind ensemble, and jazz band that I record regularly get only
Red 
Book CDs from me.