as far as I'm aware the only benefit of 96khz recordings is that you can
really intensively digitally edit them and experience less loss than you
would at 44.1/48khz.
now I havent heard a 24bit recording (yet), but I can say I've heard 20bit
CD releases, and the difference was staggering :D I would definetly pay
extra for some albums to get that extra shine..I think the aural exciter
really pays off at this quality ;)
I think Cds will be backwards compatible for a long time yet, and for tthe
majority of music released on them, 16/44.1 is good enough :)
thx
Shawn Perwick
ICQ#: 15448652
__________________________________________________________________
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Redfern" <bredfern@calarts.edu>
To: "Dan Haskovec" <dan@pry.com>
Cc: "skism" <cazeone@ramdis.com>; "idm-l" <idm@hyperreal.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:36 PM
Subject: RE: [idm] mass storage // MP3's
quoted 17 lines This is true, I just go0t a 24bit 96 khz soundcard for the first time and> This is true, I just go0t a 24bit 96 khz soundcard for the first time and
> the difference is truly stunning, Cd's sound soemwhat flat and lifeless
> because they're 16 bit 44.1 khz, so now that I'm hearing stuff recorded at
> dvd quality, I am certainly blown away. Too bad dvd is such a problematic
> format, with teh stupid country encryption, etc. Also it will mean that an
> albumn will cost even more to buy, while the artist will get even less of
> a cut, as its a "new format".
>
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Dan Haskovec wrote:
>
> > A DVD can store 5-10 times as much data as an audio CD, which allows for
> > much higher audio resolution and/or sampling rates when used for two
> > channel audio.
> >
> > dan
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org