Subject: | 7. Re: Olympus LS-14 initial thoughts |
---|---|
From: | "Raimund" animalsounds |
Date: | Sun Jan 6, 2013 2:22 am ((PST)) |
> I'm guessing this is purely techno babble. Hi Max, I fully agree on that. We recently talked here about the misinformation that is circulating in the professional audio domain and this is a good example for that (thanks very much to Eric for providing safe information on the subject). The strange thing is that a hole industry is partly built on false assumptions. Why do they advertize mass-market recording equipment supporting sample rates of up to 96 or 192 kHz if nobody can hear anything above 18 kHz? In fact it is just a waste of resources... There is however a real benefit for those who need to record ultrasonic sounds, such as bat researchers. The mass-production of this 192 kHz gear fortunately leads to affordable prices. Regards, Raimund |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [Nature Recordists] Re: Olympus LS-14 initial thoughts, Max Catterwell |
---|---|
Next by Date: | 1. Re: iRig pre, Raimund |
Previous by Thread: | 6. Re: Olympus LS-14 initial thoughts, Eric Benjamin |
Next by Thread: | (no subject), jbkuma |
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