Those are good points Gianni. As a post production person I would
certainly like to see more people recording in 24/96, it makes a
massive difference when mixing multiple tracks.
Often the discussion of the benefits of higher sampling rates focuses
on the high frequency spectrum, but it makes a real difference to the
low end too, comparing the lower registers of a Cello or Double Bass
at 44 and 96 will leave you with little doubt.
Sure these two issues are maybe not directly relevant to nature
recordists.. but it's certainly not esoteric.
> - some years ago I participated to studies on monkeys where the
> animals were trained to react to specific sounds. but when testing
> them with 44.1kHz recordings the animals did not react. then we
> switched to 96 kHz and the animals reacted with the same frequency as
> with "live" natural sounds. Of course we are not monkeys, but many
> acoustic events have high frequency components that are relevant for
> their accurate identification and description.
that's very interesting actually, I used to notice when I had a cat
around the house that he just wouldn't react to the disembodied
sounds coming out of my speakers, yet would jump at the smallest
'real' sound. I used to work exclusively in 44.1 in those days and I
could never work out why the cat would never react, I could play bird
calls, dogs barking and he would barely flinch. Coincidence maybe,
but interesting.
Steve
|