Message Board

(This was posted in the other thread) All of this depends directly with the quality of the resampling algorithm; I suspect 90+% of the people on this board (myself included) could not detect the difference between downsampling 96 and 88.2 to 44.1 ASSUMING THE CONVERSION WAS OF VERY HIGH QUALITY. Hmm...

All of this depends directly with the quality of the resampling algorithm; I suspect 90+% of the people on this board (myself included) could not detect the difference between downsampling 96 and 88.2 to 44.1 ASSUMING THE CONVERSION WAS OF VERY HIGH QUALITY. Hmmm.... perhaps I must qualify my stance...

To add to the above, I'd personally take a higher bit depth over a higher sample rate any day of the week. This ONLY applies, again, if the material will only be released on CD. If you have the budget (storage and processing-wise), working at a higher sample rate is a good idea for the future of aud...

The division by 2 thing is complete, total, utter BS. Please stop propagating this myth, as it's completely untrue. I _promise_ I'm not trying to be a dick, but read Ken Pohlman's Principals of Digital Audio and tell me that statement again. Or better yet: Record a full set of drums at 88.2 and 96,...

PS: if you're going to CD only, track everything at 44.1. If you're going to eventually do a DVD thing, 48 or 96 is ok. But if you're ONLY going to CD, 44.1 from start to finish is HIGHLY advised for the above reasons.

Chopping a sample rate in half is significantly "better" for your audio than, say, going from 48 to 44.1. The reasons are simple: if you're cutting the rate in half, you (theoretically) remove every other sample and make a small change to the header of the file. If you have to remove every [(48-44.1...

Most mastering houses these days only accept a freshly cut wax cyllinder. But burning 24 bit wave files, saved as a data CD should work well for most places. You need too ask the mastering house.

Anything is better than a flat, concrete wall. Go for some kind symmetry though, if you can.

Have you had those Crisp'ums by Quaker? Quite the big tasty...

This mic obviously has a low-end build up. Probably smells bad too. But GC will take it back as long as you tell them you didn't exactly sing into it.

No, cutting 12+dB at 200-400 is a very common technique, especially in the live arena. What scares me a bit though is you boosting, especially at the low end. I typically use a 31-band and a decent compressor/ gate at the tracking stage (always in live sound). I'll yank out almost everything from ab...

Spark comes to mind, as does Toast and Jam, but if they make Wavelab or Sound Forge for Mac, check those out too.

Okay dokey, I'm pretty sick of mixing in a room that's 150 feet long and 50 feet wide and the people at the back of the room can't seem to hear the vocals, or _insert instrument here_. [this delimma carries over to almost all of the bars we work at] Of course, the mix sound great at the dance floor,...

You guys have it easy. Try $4500

They're not bad, one of the better 8 channel packages in that price range. Only problem I had was that I couldn't seem to get enough gain sometimes. But the IDSS feature is kinda cool. If you're _sure_ you want eight identical preamps, go for it. I'd personally opt for two (or more) two-channel mode...