[
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