View Single Post
  #6  
Old 31.01.2008, 12:29 PM
Onkel Dunkel's Avatar
Onkel Dunkel Onkel Dunkel is offline
Aged Veteran
Aged Veteran
 
Join Date: 12.08.2004
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 908
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by logo80 View Post
You can't hear the difference of the sampling... but you can hear aliasing phenomena. So the highest you sample, less aliasing you hear. 48 IS better than 41 and if you downgrade to 41 with a good aliasing suppressor you'll gain some quality. No one can hear over 22 KHz so for the well known theorem you have to use double KHz in sampling. Every KHz more will make you a little more happy.
For acoustic purpouse I always use 48KHz and I'm pretty happy about it when downgrading to 44100... for other kind of recoring I always use 44100 and 24 bit as mentioned before.
Regards, Lorenzo
I have the option of running 88,2 that some say is better than 96 kHz if you plan to downmix to CD quality (44,1 kHz, 16 bit) because half of 88,2 is 44,1 it will be devided by a nice even "2" instead of the more uneven devision of "2,176870748299319727891156462585". This will in your case mean that you devide by "1,0884353741496598639455782312925" instead of just doing it in 44,1 kHz from the start. It makes sence to me but still this is pure theory and i really don“t know if you will be able to hear the diffenrence. Still Doc is right when saying go to 24 or 32 bits instead of 16. This will give you a lot more than 48 kHz will...
__________________
If you go to bed with a scratchy ass, you will wake up with smelly fingers...

http://www.myspace.com/onkeldunkeldk
Reply With Quote