Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
 
I had a similar experience with the last project we recorded. It was tracked in PT at 96K, mixed at 96K in SONAR and mastered to at  96K and finally downsampled to 44.1 for the CD master. I did a test loading up both a 44.1K and 96K track in SONAR (in a 96K project). Then I phase inverted the two tracks and bounced the result down to a new track. I was surprised with the result. What was left was some noise that was completely inaudible even if I cranked the volume all the way up :)
So unless something went wrong during the capture or mastering process that I was unaware of, this probably means that there was nothing significant in the recording that took advantage of the 96K range. I can't generalize here since its definitely possible that you may get different results with other music that has more HF content - however in my case this didn't make anyy diffference for all  practical purposes at all.

 
That hardly seems like a logical way to draw a conclusion. :-S
 
I happen to work at 44.1 and 48, so I'm have no compelling reason to justify any other choice, however I am bemused by a lack of veracity in the explanations offered as justification for conclusions being shared.
 
It seems like an actual comparison would require a protocol featuring side by side capture, mixing, 
mastering, (all at the respective specifications) a final export to the distribution specification, and perhaps a digital to analog conversion.
 
If you arrive at the same conclusion after that, your conclusion will be based on an actual comparison rather than an implication that a comparison was made.
 
 
 
 
BTW, I think one of the more entertaining scaremonger phrases in the Science article is
 
"To people who study these things, it’s become clear that doubling and quadrupling sample rates instead of improving converters is a lousy economic tradeoff for consumers, as well as for the environment and the larger economy." 
 
 
I'm curious about the reasoning that supports this scientific statement:
 
"There is also the separate problem of distortion caused by the decreased sampling accuracy of a rate that is too fast."
 
Too fast for what? I'm just guessing here; Is this some sort of implication that the current implementation of clocking in some of the high speed converters is not suitable for the task? Are we really to believe that this issue is inherently insurmountable or is it more probable that this may be the case in specific implementations?
 
Those are the types of statements presented in that article that seem like a load of hooey.
 
 
 
best regards,
mike
 
 

I believe 8 bit sample rates are cool.
.... but then I quite like chicken....
Hmm....
 
Well there's only one way to find out....
 
 

Hence this too from one of my much earlier posts:
 
Real World now. I have created an AB test session where a very high quality analog signal (finest turntable, vinyl,pickup, RIAA equaliser etc) was sent to one side of an AB switch. That same signal was bottle necked through 16 bit 44.1K A to D and D to A and fed to the other side of the switch. Volume differences between the two switch positions were removed totally. Even with expert engineers and very high quality monitoring (and environment) many had no idea what they were listening to. I did this based on this article:
 
http://mixonline.com/reco...emperors_new_sampling/
 
This is test is rather interesting. The pure analog turntable signal represents the finest quality signal we can generate in the analog domain. (easily anyway) The best vinyl too are the Sheffield Lab recordings from the 80's where bands played live, were fully mixed and this signal fed direct to the cutting lathe avoiding all tape based stuff in between. You have to hear this to believe it. I have got an album with Dave Grusin featuring Lee Ritenour, Ron Carter and Harvey Mason. It sounds like you are standing right in front of Harvey's kit! It is a real eye opener in how fast the whole groove stylus thing can be when it needs to be. You need the finest headshell, cartridge (Shure V15 Type III) tone arm and RIAA preamp. (Music Fidelity, $1000 for a RIAA EQ!) I have got all this setup. (Dark Side of the Moon sounds ridiculous on this setup too even to this day)
 
Another source of super analogue would be a two track reel to reel machine playing back a very high quality master. I have got that too and it works exactly the same way. (I produced a really fine acoustic folk CD and did digital hard drive mixes but also mastered at the same time direct to a high speed mastering reel to reel machine. You have to hear that too to believe it!)
 
You would need 382Khz and 24 bit probably to represent it the best. It is hard to tell what you are listening to when you do this test. Analog or 16 bit 44.1KHz digital.  It demonstrates very clearly that even 44.1K 16 bit represents things amazingly well.
 
I discovered something amazing recently. I was in a studio recording with musicians for two days straight recently and during a break one of the guys told me about the album 'Captain Fingers' from Lee Ritenour. It is the most amazing mix and it was all on vinyl. I am amazed at how modern this sounds. Sounds like it could have been done yesterday. On the finest turntable it must be incredible. I am keen to track it down. The music is amazing too. The sound of this record is so wide and extended frequency response wise and so transient it is jaw dropping. A fine example of the medium not holding anything back in any shape or form. What you hear is the vision from some amazing producer and mix engineer.

 

Fingers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAT4NDGHdz8
 

8 bit version (two fingers):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYA4V81KIxE

Hahahahaha, amazing.
 
Do you remember the Buck Rogers episode that was from? That was amazing. Hang on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJkbVAs8rjo
 
<click> <click> just go with the music, yeah.

"What are you doing?"
 
"It's called gettin down"
 

Indeed, I raise your Colonel Deering with an Andromeda, the template of Daft Punk:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KA63cFI9mfc
 
 
 

Ha, this is actually fantastic.