Well, ya, the big guy is severly low-passed in mp3. But this bird is
like that. Check out the side by side of the wave vs the mp3 that I
mixed within one wave file.
350 kb download at:
http://home.comcast.net/~richpeet/GHO.wav
My feelings on Surround should have been based as a question.
This stuff is so mixed with sales hype that to figure out how to work
with it is really hard.
I got into trouble reading at:
http://www.dolby.com/professional/Support/tech.overview.html#DolbyDigi
tal
It appears that you can not have 4 channels of 10khz range birds
singing at the same time and cover them with full bit depth. That was
the sparrow comment. The thunder comment is probably workable with
hours of post. When a signal uses both the areas above and below the
lfe channel the sums and sides appear to be very hard to work with.=20
Maybe it can be done with a lot of work. It appears that the rear
surround channels were put there for sound reinforcement and not to
be used as full distinct channels.
I will continue to educate myself and work in full 4 channel but
geeze Dan do you have a magic decoder ring that can tell us if this
tech will work for us if we want full four channel with high bit
depth?
Rich Peet
--- In Dan Dugan <> wrote:
> Rich Peet, you wrote:
>
> >Now with GHOW's you can get by with a tiny mp3 file because of
those
> >nice low notes.
> >
> ><20 kb download
> >http://home.comcast.net/~richpeet/GHO1.mp3
>
> Yeah, but it sounds low-passed...
>
> >But if my reading is right you can not even put a sparrow or
thunder
> >on the surround channels of dolby 5.1. Looks like home theator
will
> >not be our future format.
>
> Please explain.
>
> -Dan Dugan
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|