[LAU] Pro Audio? OT rant.

[Ralf Mardorf]

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