View Single Post
Old 9th April 2011
Lives for gear
GoldMember's Avatar
Originally Posted by Majestikc View Post
At first I thought this was a really good idea, but now I don't really see the point....

Let's just say for arguments sake that your converter only captures 90% of the incoming sound, if you're only recording that sound once, as we all do, then it's not that big a deal, but obviously then if you run that same sound round and round through the converter 10 times it's going to loose 10% every time etc etc etc............the only thing is nobody does this, it's normally just once in and out.

So the main test would still be to record just once using different converters and then compare them.

I'll still be doing this test anyway just to see HOW much degradation there is.
At first I thought this was a really bad idea,
then it got very interesting..
now im ok.

converters at 44.1 16bit capture much less than analog.

lossing money its not acceptable..
lossing audio is?

youtube and .mp3 at 128kbps its unsoportable... takes out all the joy of listening music,.
i have records from 1979 that sound amazing. LOL.