[bct] Re: ilestone recorder

  • From: The Scarlet Wombat <coconut@xxxxxxx>
  • To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 06:41:14 -0500

The bit rate is not the criterion for professional recordings. The fact that it records mp3 files is the problem. Whenever you edit an mp3, even if you do not know it, the file is being decompressed in the background and recompressed. There are differences that can be heard between a 192 kbps mp3 and a wav recorded with a bit depth of 24 and a sample rate of 48 or 96 khz.

It is true that using consumer grade gear, one might not tell the difference, but there are truly differences. There is a thing called head room, not meaning how your hat fits, that comes from the olden days of tape recording. A 24 bit sample recording has more head room and latitude for effects and normalization than an mp3, no matter the bit rate.

You are right, however, that for many, a 192 kbps mp3 would be fully satisfactory.


Other related posts: