--- In Kevin Colver <>
wrote:
> This will be a format to keep an eye on.
Sorry to be negative, but I think it's a format to keep an eye off!
It's been around for too long now and has really gone nowhere of
significance. I can remember going to the Australian launch of SACD
(which uses DSD) back in 1999 or thereabouts, and playing with it a
bit later. The sound was very acceptable to me, I might have even
preferred it over PCM if given the chance to do a proper blind AB
test. But the audible difference (if any) between it and PCM were not
worth the investment required to work with the stuff - 24/96 sounds
good enough to me. I think that is how most people felt about it.
> In the mean time, good mic
> placement and field-craft probably count more for a good nature
> recording than going from excellent gear to super-excellent gear.
Every single time! If you were to break down the contribution of the
technology alone to the sound of a recording, the microphone would
contribute about 85%. 10% would be the preamp, and the remaining 5%
would be the AD converters. And when you factor in mic placement and
field craft, the total contribution of the technology alone is
probably about 20%.
- Greg Simmons
|