On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 13:28 +0100, Carlo Capocasa wrote: > My question, how useful is 192kHz for practical purposes? How quickly is > that likely to change? I'd really appreciate some advice here, thank you. It's a controversial issue, so be prepared to encounter many different opinions. >From a practical standpoint, I believe that 192 is only rarely needed. 96 should be just as good. It is not likely that the situation is going to change in the near future. You need extremely high-quality (and extremely expensive) components in your audio chain to exploit the difference between 192 and 96. You also need very good mixing and mastering skills in order to stay at the top of the quality ladder. I would be much more worried about the bit depth - use 24bit instead of 16 whenever possible throughout the processing chain. -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/
