=A0
I still think that if the maths are done correctly there will be no l=
oss at all.. some plugins may have 'strange' algorithms for doing this, but=
if you find the right one, or better if you program this yourself in some =
platform then it should be totally transparent..
m
On 20 =CE=91=CF=85=CE=B3 2010, at 7:09 =CF=80.=CE=BC., Dan Dugan wrote:
> > Yes the sample rate remains the same. Yes the file size probably remain=
s the same. And yes the duration of the recording stays the same. But I fin=
d it hard to believe that a twice edited digital file (L/R -> M/S -> L/R) i=
s a bit for bit exact copy of the original(even if you exclude the headers =
from the comparison).
>
> I wouldn't expect it would be, but the "generation loss" would be down in=
the noise bits and insignificant. MS equalization is quite commonly done i=
n mastering suites, where you find the best monitors and ears in the busine=
ss.
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|