2 Jan
2006
2 Jan
'06
3:02 p.m.
woodelf wrote:
3) Digital CD Audio has too low a sampling rate
Incorrect. Unless you have magic ears that can pick out a 22KHz tone
from a 21Khz tone, don't say the sampling rate is
too low. That's one
of the biggest lies. Yes, there are people who say that
the inaudible
frequencies carry vibration that affects the listening experience, but
that's another load of crap I don't want to get into (and the only way
you're going to prove to me that your speakers can even reproduce that
is to send me a video of an 'scope showing me >22Khz output).
However, all that being said:
and often too few bits of DAC.
Correct. 16-bit is nice, but 24-bit is actually discernable at most
sampling rates (ie. it actually shows up on A/B blind testing with quiet
material). What hurts more is that many early 1980s CDs were mastered
with *12-bit* equipment, which is why many audiophiles from that era
still discriminate against them (even though those problems were
corrected across the industry by the mid 1980s, although many post
houses still highpass at 20KHz, something I don't necessarily endorse).
48Khz @ 24-bit is the valid audible range of all humans, "golden ears"
or not. When I do my own work, I sample at 96KHz/24-bit and work with
multiple tracks internally 32-bit, but that's only so that nothing is
lost mathematically in my mixing. My end delivery output is still
48KHz/24-bit.
but dirt is the bane of them. Once you get real
sampling rates and good
DAC's output then Digital
is better, but can one get the less mainstream music nowdays on CD.
DVD-Audio has such technology; so much so that traditionally analog-only
artists like Neil Young and the prog rock group Rush are embracing the
technology.
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org)
World's largest electronic gaming project: http://www.MobyGames.com/
A delicious slice of the demoscene: http://www.MindCandyDVD.com/
Various oldskool PC rants and ramblings: http://www.oldskool.org/