naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 16 Bit & 24 Bit recordings

Subject: Re: 16 Bit & 24 Bit recordings
From: "Tim Nielsen" supernielsen
Date: Fri May 25, 2007 7:11 am ((PDT))
Also be aware that most microphones are built so that they roll off
any sounds above 20kHz anyway. There are a few microphones that are
'high sampling' rate mics, like the Sennhieser MKH800, the Schoeps
CMC6 XT series. Also a hydrophone usually records very high sampling
rate. Sanken makes an omni, the CO-100K that is relatively flat to
Message: 100k. 
Subject: But it's true, these and 96k are mainly used for capturing
something outside the human hearing range, and then altering playback
sample rate so that it falls within the range of human hearing.

As far as imaging, that is one of the arguments for 96k. But I've
almost always heard it from classical music engineers and super
audiophiles, listening back on $10,000 speaker system.

I do like recording in 96k for the extra fidelity that is preserved
when pitching sounds down for creative purposes. Otherwise, it's just
wasted space for normal recording.


On May 25, 2007, at 6:35 AM, Martyn Stewart wrote:

> >>>>>Sorry if this adding to the confusion but no one has
> mentioned 96kHz sampling rate?
> Would this make 'more' of a difference than 24 bits
> would perhaps to any recording?
> I have seen reports by various people who have used
> 96khz saying that they felt the 'stereo imaging' was
> much better defined especially at the HF end with much
> less 'smearing' of the image at these upper
> frequencies.
> So perhaps those that can should record 24 bit 96khz?
> OK delivering such a recording on CD is probably not
> going to benefit from sampling at 96khz, but Super
> Audio CD's would.<<<<<<<
>
> Great for recording bats, rodents and insects then re-sampling but
> that's as
> far as it goes, I have recorded some great bat sounds in this
> frequency but
> of course you can only hear them if you down-sample..
>
> As far as "less smearing" etc, again, you can not tell the
> difference with
> the human ear, this is all tech talk as far as I'm concerned.
>
> Phil
>
> Martyn
>
> ****************************************
>
> Martyn Stewart
>
> Bird and Animal Sounds Digitally Recorded at:
>
> http://www.naturesound.org
>
> Redmond. Washington. USA
>
> N47.65543 W121.98428
>
> e-mail: 
>
> Tel: 425-898-0462
>
> Make every Garden a wildlife Habitat!
>
> *****************************************
>
> .
>
> <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=3D97359714/grpId=3D2126860/
> grpspId=3D1705083663/msgId
> =3D28587/stime=3D1180097312/nc1=3D3848514/nc2=3D3848567/nc3=3D3848590>
>
>
>
>
>








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

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