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

[Raül Bonell <raul.bonell@gmail.com>]

2011/12/15, van Sinn <vansinn@post.cybercity.dk>:

> Reyn Ouwehand wrote:
>> If your material has to end on a CD, record on 88.2kHz. If it's for film
>> record on 96kHz. Due to the math..
>
> I assume you mean that an 88.2 Khz sample only needs to downscaled by a
> factor
> two to arrive at 44.1 Khz..
> Which isn't so.  The 88.2 signal will need to be calculated and dithered
> exactly the same way as with any other bitrate.

that makes sense. guess i got it from bob katz book. 96 Khz should
better for compatibility matters, 88.2 Khz because uses less storage
space, but quality humanly indistinguishable, suposing a stable clock
for both sample rates on the same capturing device.


.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-..-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
Your moral values are meaningless, artificial constructs. For your 
imagination,
they provide you a falsely superior position in your social group.
For the strong, they provide a means by which you are easily manipulated.
In reality, they serve the entertainment needs of others.
In the Kimatorium, they are irrelevant.

Kim Flint
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
raulbonell.tumblr.com - collective.com