5 Nov
2002
5 Nov
'02
10:30 a.m.
i don't care what the theoretical arguments are for
any technology: if
you can't demonstrate that the improvement can be reliably heard by a
majority of humans in double blind testing, i'm not interested.
Higher sample rate might be an appeal for historians or librarians
because it (sort of) better represents the material that is preserved.
One day when the industry pushes to 1024khz sample rate, one can even
sample most AM radio on their work. How nice. Imagine playing them back
is like having a small AM radio station.
On the other hand, I think Paul's argument does apply to many other
technologies in general. Am I a happier human being now or 600 years
ago? But how to do double blind testing on that?
liulk