Subject: | 1. Re: 24 bit vs 16 bit recordings |
---|---|
From: | "stoatwizard" stoatwizard |
Date: | Wed May 23, 2007 6:29 am ((PDT)) |
> So.. there was a possible sense in what those guys did, back > then, when they copied their digital tracks to their Ampex and back? > Covered some digital noise with tape hiss and modulation noise? Is > that possible? > I mean, they were terribly ridiculed, still perhaps right, but in a > way that we didn't understand at the time? shouldn't they have done that the other way round - get the tape hiss onto the analogue signal before the A/D conversion which then acts to dither the signal? Quantisation distortion once added can never be removed... |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: Understanding bit-depth conversion and dithering, Mark R. |
---|---|
Next by Date: | 2. Re: 24 bit vs 16 bit recordings, Scott Fraser |
Previous by Thread: | 1. Re: 24 bit vs 16 bit recordings, Walter Knapp |
Next by Thread: | 2. Re: 24 bit vs 16 bit recordings, stoatwizard |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
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