Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info
[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Re: OT: 24Bit/96Khz vs 16Bit/ 44.1Khz recording

On 7/22/64 11:59 AM, David Gans wrote:
I record all my gigs at 96-24. Better to archive, and better to produce, in high-res and downsample at the last stage. 
What I've always wondered:

Does a recording at 96-24 downsampled to 44-16
sound better than a recording sampled only at 44-16, initially.

And if so,  what's the logic?
Daniel Thomas once explained the answer to me a long time ago, but I have completely forgotten what 
he told me.    Please forgive the brain fart.

Rick Walker