On 19-Jun-2004 Vescovi Christophe wrote: } RickTaylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx a écrit : } > :} 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? ---------------------------------- E-Mail: RickTaylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: 19-Jun-2004 Time: 21:51:45 This message was sent by XFMail ----------------------------------
