20 Jun
2004
20 Jun
'04
1:05 a.m.
On 19-Jun-2004 Vescovi Christophe wrote:
} RickTaylor(a)speakeasy.net a �crit :
} > :} I *need* those sounds.
} Sorry but this is a bad example .....
} This example has nothing to do with the sample rate of the sample
} (sound) but with the method used to implement a digital delay effect.
} In the case you are exposing you will certainly have the same effect
} with a initial 24/48 sample rate up-sampled to 96 just to process the
} effect. This method was used by Steinberg in one of their VST EQ plugin
} in order to improved the response of the EQ in high frequency.
} You don't need 24/96 to have those sound, you need better digital effect
} processors !!!
It's a perfectly good example... It's indicative of the results that I get
overall. With 24/96 I get what I want... regardless of the reasons behind
it. Why would I use anything else? Because someone else tells me I should?
----------------------------------
E-Mail: RickTaylor(a)Speakeasy.Net
Date: 19-Jun-2004
Time: 21:51:45
This message was sent by XFMail
----------------------------------