Print

Print


Absolutely Goran! 

But then if your amp goes to 11, then why not turn it up to 11!?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbVKWCpNFhY

For a few years we've been working on a music project digitising first-generation masters from 30ips 1/2" Ampex 499 to 192k 24 bit.  We don't have any proof that the 192k files are better or worse than 48k or even 96k, other than after much chin stroking it has been decided that it sounds good. 

And when you're in the business of making records that's what counts! You'd hope. 

alex.




-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goran Finnberg
Sent: 11 April 2012 20:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [ARSCLIST] High Resolution Audio was Recording_78rpm_records

Richard Hess:

> IASA TC04 Ver 2 says the archival standard is
> 48/24 but higher rates may
> be beneficial for many program types.

As always there´s lots of speculations and no carefully done listening tests
of any kind.

We can all have our own opinon and those working professionally around me,
studios, mobile recording operations recording classical music etc have all
stated that while there´s maybe some slight difference using higher sample
rate then they have all gone back to 48/24 as nobody will hear the
difference if any.

But anytime there is a very carefully done test using very good equipment
then almost everyone cannot hear any difference whatsoever.

So far I have not seen any competently done test that shows there is any
difference at all in almost all cases read so far.

I myself have done several hundred such comparisions and are quite content
to use 44/24 and properly done wordlenght reductions shows the only
difference between 44/16 and 44/24 is slight hiss at -93 db F/S in the 44/16
reduction.

http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projekte/diplomarbeiten/dsdvspcm/aes_paper_608
6.pdf

Or use: http://tinyurl.com/ctxxgfz

To read about a VERY carefully done comparision between 176/24 and DSD and
the experts are consistent in their inability to hear any difference at all.

Now if any of you disagrees then I would suggest that you set up your own
tests to prove if there really is an audible difference in competently
designed and executed 44/16 files from anything "better".

We all know, I hope, that everything below 20 kHz in 44/24 is identical in
192/24 and that the difference between 16 and 24 bits is -93 dB/FS noise
compared to -144 dB noise when properly using dither.

But then it truly IS important to claim "High Resolution" whatever that
truly means in practice.

It sounds soooo goood really impressive....... :-)


-- 
Best regards,

Goran Finnberg
The Mastering Room AB
Goteborg
Sweden

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

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") Smurfen:RIP





-----------------------------


Registered Office: 15 Stukeley Street, London WC2B 5LT, England.
Registered in England number 1421223

This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited. Please note that the information provided in this e-mail is in any case not legally binding; all committing statements require legally binding signatures.


http://www.inflightproductions.com