[studiorecorder] Re: Recording question
- From: "David Tanner" <David.Tanner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Sr" <studiorecorder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, neal.ewers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 15:14:28 -0500
I have done this a time or two, and it may sound a little better,
but I didn't think it sounded that much better to hardly make it
worth the time. Of course you could try recording something with
SoundForge at its' top sample rate and then pull it back down. That
was what I did, and it did seem that the top end frequencies may
have been a little clearer, but not enough that the average person
would ever notice the difference.
David Tanner
Rehabilitation Program Specialist 3
Assistive Technology Specialist
Assistive Technology Department
MN State Services f/t Blind
Office- 651-642-0795 Cell- 651-270-2233
Skype name: dtat100
>>> neal.ewers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 5/23/2006 1:44 PM >>>
There is a theory I have heard that goes something like this. Rob
and
others, what do you think?
If you are recording something that will ultimately be produced on
CD at
a sampling rate of 44100, it is better to record at 44100 and 24
bit
than it is to record at 48000 and resample. Obviously you
ultimately
have to change the bit rate to 16, but what about it being better
to
record at the original sample rate rather than resampling? Any
thoughts?
Neal
BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
X-GWTYPE:USER
FN:Tanner, David
TEL;WORK:651-642-0795
ORG:;SSB
TEL;PREF;FAX:651-649-5927
EMAIL;WORK;PREF;NGW:DTANNER@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
N:Tanner;David
TITLE:Rehab Tech Spec
END:VCARD
Other related posts:
