On Mon, 2012-12-24 at 15:29 +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 12:39:17PM -0500, Thomas
Vecchione wrote:
And for the record, the basic reasoning for what
I said is simple, and has
existed for quite some time, that 44.1kHz is capable of containing more
than the entire human hearing range of an undamaged ear (Reproducing all
frequencies up to just above 22k).
Yeah, but what about harmonics? For truly PRO work, analog should be
used. CD's came out as the poor mans quality stereo, it was a compromise
for high quality vinyl. Just as McDonalds is a poor compromise for a
quality restaurant. But with the proliferation of advertising, huge
product selection, the rising cost of the real quality goods; digital
and McDonalds soon became the norm. [snip]
44.1 was a compromise to get enough minutes on a CD, later when consumer
DAT was introduced it wasn't needed to take care about the length, so
they came with 48 KHz.
Vinyl is another issue. I prefer vinyl, because records are similar to
living beings. They get old, they get scratches, but there's no data
loss, the mechanical principle allow it to play them with a needle on
paper, there isn't the need to have a device with special encoding. The
cover art is much nicer.
Merry Christmas!
Ralf