Bernie, the first time I saw you mention the MP3 model for your
sales, you spoke glowingly about the lack of manufacturing, ordering,
shipping, stocking and all the hard facts that are absent with online
delivery. Perhaps you might reiterate it for Robert (and the rest of
And I'd like to add - not to counter you really - but I have had cats
all my life and played nature recordings for most of them. The FIRST
time one of my cats ever looked at the speakers and tried to find the
birds inside or behind was when I played a CD of nature sounds (1991,
Gordon Hampton's (sp?) Billabong CD). so CD was at the least better
than anything before, including Environments on Lps. Yet I share the
preference for at least 24 bit whenever possible.
On Dec 15, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Bernie Krause wrote:
In my opinion, neither are optimal, Robert. I have always hated the
Subject: 1/16 on CDs. Literally irritates me and I always have a hard time
listening to music or natural sounds
in that format. Because the MP3 low quality compression is expected,
I don't have so much of a problem
with the delivery because it doesn't promise more and so it's not
heard with an ear critical to that
type of formatting. It ain't a myth. The iTune folks have traded
digital real estate for quality and that, I'm afraid,
is also where the industry is headed at the moment.
In the studio, I have converted all my old analog material to
Subject: 1/24bit and typically record in the field using that format or
96/24, depending on the program material. Sounds lots better.
On Dec 15, 2007, at 9:30 AM, Robert Heckendorn wrote:
> I have a stack of Bernie Krause's wonderful CDs. I have visited
> Bernie's site recently and noticed that the store is filled with
> 192kbps MP3s. This is the iTune model of delivery.