[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Questions for audio gurus

Subject: Re: Questions for audio gurus
From: "Rich Peet" <>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 19:26:01 -0000
--- In  Dan Seven <> wrote:
> Hello Audio gurus:
> A quick question or 2 ..If a recorder is capable of a frequency
range of 20
> to 20kHz such as a new Tascam HD P2 and it can utilize192 kHz sampling
> frequency, can you actually hear the upper end of the audible range

I record at above 44.1 only if I intend to pitch shift down what is up
there. Some "Golden ears" state they can hear a better sound with the
more smooth wave forms created at 192.  I can not.

> i can hear to 18.5 Khz or so and then it gets "iffy"
> If a good pair of speakers and a CD player is what everyone uses,
then why
> would CD quality 16 bit 44.1 playback need to be exceeded for consumer
> consumption.

Most are playing back sounds in a room that does not exceed 60db s/n.
I well exceed that, but that is only important for what I record for me.

The biggest issue is when you have quiet sounds that you are going to
amplify for playback on a consumer system.  This is where and when you
need every bit that you can grab.

Do we all have these playback resources and do we not all have
> ears that hear the same limited range?
> The Portadisc records 10 to 20 kHz and the lower frequency is easier
to hear
> for people, as in Ruffed Grouse drumming and many many other sounds.
Is this
> more useful in actual practice or do most mics simply not achieve
those low
> subwoofer does..

My low frequency mics have shown me much in playback that I did not
hear live. Few of us have full spectrum sub bass so this is another
thing that has little to do with things outside of my system controls.
 For my recordings, you either hear it at my house or I would happily
have you let me set up an installation for a group.  I have become a
fan for 4.4 surround over 5.1.

> The search for meaning here is to achieve an understanding as to the
> practical recording qualities and capabilities necessary to match
> playback resources with an audio result that we can actually HEAR,
and not
> imagine MUST be there.
> I am sure that most of you can contribute a better viewpoint than I
> and much appreciated.
> Thanks beforehand, Dan7
Ideal record rate for me for an expected edit and production at 44.1
/16 is 44.1 at 24 bit.



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU