[Harp-L] Re: Microtrack

["Less Paul" <lesspaul58@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Not Mr Hodgson .. But a good digital audio primer is probably in order. A
quick search turned up this one which isn't half bad:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1460716,00.asp
 
Approximate answers to your questions -- 

Roughly stated, the larger the bit width the more accurate the sample. The
higher the sample rate, the more often samples are taken. Therefore the
higher the bit width and the higher the sample rate, the more accurate the
audio. However, human hearing has its limits. 16-bit, 44.1khz is what you
hear on a CD -- a majority of people are very happy with that quality. 

Nyquist determined that a sampling rate twice the recorded frequency is
sufficient for accurate reproduction -- as the human ear can't hear much
over 20khz, that is where the 44.1khz came from. -- this is generally
accepted, but there are those with golden ears who don't agree. This 2x
frequency has come to be called the Nyquist frequency.

If you don't plan on doing any post-recording processing and going straight
to CD, 16-bit 44.1khz recording is fine. However, if you plan on processing
the data, the higher the fidelity the better as degradation is inevitible
when applying effects, mixing etc.

Typically, you will see bit-widths of 16, 24, or 32 bits (not 96).
Sampling rates can be from 8khz and up -- typical rates on higher end gear
are 44.1khz, 48khz, and 96khz.

As others have indicated in this thread, higher resolution = better sound
but larger files, slower processing, etc.

The above primer should have a lot more to say on the subject.

Paul 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of jazmaan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 7:10 PM
> To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Harp-L] Re: Microtrack
> 
> Thanks for the technical expertise Mr. Hodgson!  I'm sure 
> we're boring some of the non-techies
> here to tears, but I have to ask one more question.   Can you 
> please explain the pros and cons of
> 16-bit vs 24-bit vs 96-bit recording?   And while you're at 
> it explain why the Microtrack can be
> set for 32, 44.1 or 48khz?    If I understand it correctly, 
> anything destined for CD should be
> recorded at 16 bit/44.1 or it'll just have to be converted to 
> that format anyway before you can burn a CD.  Is that right?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org 
> Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l
>