Gearslutz.com - View Single Post - Is 96khz better than 48khz for multitrack digital recording?
View Single Post
Old 29th December 2007   #79
barefoot
Lives for gear
 
barefoot's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: Portland Oregon
Posts: 1,270

Quote:
Originally Posted by barefoot View Post
But it certainly puts a heavy burden of proof on anyone who claims that higher resolution playback is significantly different from 16/44.1.
I forgot to add one caveat:

This experiment is obviously subject to the limitations of current playback technology - especially loudspeakers. Perhaps if we develop loudspeakers that can effortlessly reproduce 120dB SPL at the listening position with very low distortion (0.001% ish), then high-resolution recordings will be readily discernable from regular old 16/44.1. We'll see..... emm... hear.


Btw, the authors of that article don't say that high-resolution recording isn't useful on the front end of the recording process, considering that signal processing and such can degrade things considerably. Hi-res files are common in graphic design and digital photography for just this same reason, even when they know the end result will be low-res computer images.

Thomas
__________________
Thomas Barefoot
Barefoot Sound
barefoot is offline   Reply With Quote