Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: producing a drum sample library for hydrogen
From: Lee Revell (rlrevell_AT_joe-job.com)
Date: Sun Jun 20 2004 - 07:06:22 EEST
On Sat, 2004-06-19 at 22:55, RickTaylor_AT_speakeasy.net wrote:
> On 19-Jun-2004 Vescovi Christophe wrote:
> } RickTaylor_AT_speakeasy.net a crit :
>
> } > :} I *need* those sounds.
>
> } Sorry but this is a bad example .....
> } This example has nothing to do with the sample rate of the sample
> } (sound) but with the method used to implement a digital delay effect.
> } In the case you are exposing you will certainly have the same effect
> } with a initial 24/48 sample rate up-sampled to 96 just to process the
> } effect. This method was used by Steinberg in one of their VST EQ plugin
> } in order to improved the response of the EQ in high frequency.
> } You don't need 24/96 to have those sound, you need better digital effect
> } processors !!!
>
> It's a perfectly good example... It's indicative of the results that I get
> overall. With 24/96 I get what I want... regardless of the reasons behind
> it. Why would I use anything else? Because someone else tells me I should?
>
I never meant to say anyone should use anything other than what gives
them the best sound. I should have been more specific, my point was
that I think 96khz is overkill for recording sounds from outside the
computer. Of course you should upsample and process at a higher
resolution if possible, no matter what format your input is, just
because it gives you more room for error.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Jun 20 2004 - 07:02:25 EEST