| Our Sponsors Pro Audio Products |
| |
|
|
| | Pro Shop Random Audio Product |
| |
|
|
|
| | You are not subscriber of RECORDING. You can subscribe from here now! |
|
|
|
|
| We received 76964418 page views since March 15, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
| Recording Org Navigation Map |
|
| |
| |
Home |
| |
| |
Discussions |
| |
| |
Business Section |
| |
| |
Content |
| |
| |
Info |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| PASS IT ON! Please link back to RO |
| |
|
|
|
|
Your url ad could be here!
| Author |
Message |
themachinist
Recording Org Pro Audio Group

Joined: May 05, 2008
Posts: 25
------------
Books To Read
Your Forum Posts
|
Posted:
Fri May 09, 2008 8:47 am |
  |
Keep in mind, I haven't read every post all the way through, so I apologize if this has been stated already.
I'm no audio expert or anything, but someone who has awesome equipment and the knowledge to use it could record something at 16/44.1 and it would sound way better than anything I could ever record at 24/96 with my little setup. Although I can tell a difference between recording at 16/44.1 and at 24/96, especially when you have multiple tracks. With that being said, I don't think you could ever say that recording at a higher rate is "better". If it sounds good, it sounds good. You should do a test and record the same thing, like a drum kit at 16/44.1, then try it at 24/192 and see what you like more. If you can't tell a difference after you put it on a CD, then record at 16/44.1. |
|
|
  |
 |
BrianaW
Recording Org Pro Audio Group

Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Posts: 124
Location: New York
------------
Books To Read
Your Forum Posts
|
Posted:
Fri May 09, 2008 10:34 am |
  |
Hello,
It is my opinion that I do hear a little bit of a difference between 16/44 and 24/96, especially during processing. I've even done blind tests and was able to discern between the two. I feel processing with VST's in higher rates helps them to sound slightly more like hardware. This is of course my opinion, but I do stand by it. 192 tho, I have no idea.
However, while I do think the average listener will judge music based partly on it's sound quality (and I do mean partly), I doubt these higher/lower rates would make enough of a difference to him or her (and that's the whole point right?). I would consider myself somewhat of an audiophile and I love most formats if all is done skillfully. Nothing is worse than buying a brand new sealed LP only to find out that the quality control at the pressing plant is sub par and the record sounds bad (VHS or Beta's "Bring on the Comets" comes to mind), but when it comes to digital, I think for the most part Joe Shmoe usually can't tell the difference. Most of us who can hear smaller differences in all types of sound quality actively seek it. Does anyone hear a difference betwen CD's and HDCD's? I do, but does John Q. Public? Probably not. Now Real Audio and low bit rate mp3's (64kbps) should be BANNED!!! Everyone can hear the sludge in those.
Oh, and as someone mentioned earlier, you can put .wav files on your iPod... it's great! Someone also mentioned that movie "The Stuff"...
"DON'T YOU KNOW WHO I AM?!!! I'M CHOCOLATE CHIP CHARLIE!!!!" |
|
|
  |
 |
|
|
| | | | | | | Business Section (News, Articles Classifieds etc.) |
| |
|
|
|
|