16 Jan
2007
16 Jan
'07
11:51 p.m.
Aaron Trumm wrote:
It's a debate. People have varying opinions. One
opinion is that getting
something recorded at a higher quality allows you to process more accurate
information as you mix, and so on and that school likes to record at high
sampling rates and keep it there until the last minute, and then very
carefully do conversions for cd product.
another school of thought says just record at 44.1 because it's going to be
there in the end anyway.
I think the balance has tipped in favor of the former model (recording at
higher resolutions and bit depths). that's what I do. and in the
commercial recording studios, people do that mostly (or record on analog and
then dub to really high res protools for mix down)
My digital SLR shoots in 48-bit color. The resulting color range
includes many colors outside the gamut of colors that computer displays
and printing technology can reproduce. Working from the 48-bit color
file produces much more accurate adjustments to color and dynamic range
(recovering overexposed areas and bringing up underexposed areas).
I would think that working in higher quality sound would help make for
better quality final results, even at the lower quality of a CD. Plus
you have the original high audio that could be distributed as data on
DVD, flash drives, portable hard drives ...
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community