> >If there are adverse effects of such downsampling, wouldn't that
> >also mean that when recording for CD, a sampling rate of
> >16bit/44.1KHz would be the best unless a much higher rate is
> >possible to achieve on the recording equipment in question?
My $.02, I would always use 24 bit if available but definitely not bother
with 48 KHz. 24 bit definitely makes a layperson-discernable difference
and IMO a high-quality downsample preserves some of what is captured!
Also, it's a rule of thumb that you should always downsample at the last
possible point -- ie, only to burn to CD. When possible, even just
processing and mixing at higher quality can make a big difference.
FWIW most contemporary software uses higher precision for mixing and
applying effects internally; to preserve the benefits of doing this it
makes sense to mix in high-bit rate even when working with 16/44
recordings. What's necessary (if anything) to ensure this varies from
software to software of course... in my package, Samplitude, you can
explicitly set the mixing engine to 32 or 16 bit.
best,
aaron
http://www.quietamerican.org
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|