Eric Jacobs:

> Perhaps the higher frequency information is not used nor is
> beneficial for Sonic Solutions NoNoise and Algorithmix.
> But that doesn't mean that this is true for all denoising
> algorithms and all process chains, now or in the future.  The
> implication seems to be that because Agorithmix and NoNoise do
> not benefit from frequencies greater than 20 kHz, there is no point
> in working at higher sample rates.

Please reread what Ive repeatedly stated:

I wrote:

> Yes, but my argument has to do with how the click detect
> algorithm works. It all depends on how it detects the
> clicks and since there are many different schemes out
> there it may not mean a thing.


> So I agree with the ability of the SPU to spit out above
>  20 kHz material.
> This may or may not mean a thing for the click detect process.

So I say may or may not mean a thing depending on the software click
detect algorithm used in your software.

Im trying to give an opposite viewpoint since you and Don Cox has
repeatedly stated that the ONLY POSSIBLE way of doing it is to use 96
kHz and higher for a most excellent result.

I believe that it is important to realize that this may not be optimum
in all cases without fail.

BTW, as Ulrich of Algorithmic told Stefan Lindstrom that their restoring
software works to 384 kHz so theres room for different views for sure
if you really wish to up the sampling rate if that floats your boat.

If you thinks you get Gold results with your methods and software so go
for it.

And Ill continue with 44.1 and get Gold results too.

Why not?


Goran Finnberg
The Mastering Room AB

E-mail: [log in to unmask]

Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough to
make them all yourself.    -   John Luther