On Mon, 11 Aug 1997 MultSanta@aol.com wrote:
quoted 8 lines In a message dated 97-08-11 15:47:38 EDT, daniel@eliteware.com (daniel)> In a message dated 97-08-11 15:47:38 EDT, daniel@eliteware.com (daniel)
> writes:
>
> << If it had been done in RA at just 3 megs it would not have been close to
> cd quality. >>
>
> yes, but a record isn't supposed to be cd quality, now is it?
>
uhmmmm well a record isn't supposed to be radio/telephone quality is it
now? When you record a 12 inch and mp3 it you are sampling it. The more
samples the more it will sound like the original record. The more samples
the larger the file. So if you sample something and encode at a very high
quality it will be close to how the original sounded. By your method I
would be receiving a file that sounded like the record being played
through a bad radio station or even worse through a phone.
The sound quality of an mp3 is close to that of a cd <which have a high
sampling rate (44.1k per second to be exact)>. So the mp3 is close
to how the record really sounded. Note I am not saying that mp3 uses
sample rates in the traditional sense. A dual isdn ra file can come close
to cd quality as well.
You may want to pick up a book on how recordings are done.
-dan