There must be something in this compression argument, especially for the
sorts of sounds that Rich Peet describes as "fast attack sounds". For the
first time I have noticed a difference, not between MD and DAT, but simply
between the 48 kHz recording rate of my Sony Pro DAT and the 44.1 kHz
CD-compatible rate that my computer uses.
My DAT records at 48 kHz so I need to convert this to 44.1 kHz in order to
process the sounds on my computer. To do the conversion I simply feed the
sounds from the DAT to my iMac via analogue inputs, where the sound is
automatically taken up by the computer at 44.1 kHz. Up till now I've not
noticed any difference in sound quality between sounds heard directly from
the DAT compared to the same sound once it has been fed into in the
computer.=20
But there is a particular species of frog here in Australia, the Striped
Marsh Frog (Limnodynastes peronii) that gives a loud 'tok' call, a bit like
the sound of a tennis ball being hit. I have a nice stereo recording of
these frogs, tok-ing away happily, and it sounds great on the DAT, each tok
has a beginning a middle and an end, even if such a short note. But when
reduced to 44.1, the call is less pleasing and rather sharper, and better
listened to at a lower volume. There isn't a lot of difference, but you ca=
n
hear it.=20
I thought it worthwhile to report on this perceived effect. Perhaps the
Striped Marsh Frog would make a good 'test subject' for further compression
tests!
Vicki Powys
Australia
on 14/8/03 8:56 AM, Rich Peet at wrote:
> From the low end point of view.
>
> Having heard a sound example where a very slight difference could be
> heard in my good headphones I tried to repeat the failure. The
> weakness in atrac is suppose to be best heard in fast attack sounds
> that are broad in freq.
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|