On Mon, 2012-12-24 at 15:29 +1300, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 12:39:17PM -0500, Thomas Vecchione wrote: > > And for the record, the basic reasoning for what I said is simple, and has > > existed for quite some time, that 44.1kHz is capable of containing more > > than the entire human hearing range of an undamaged ear (Reproducing all > > frequencies up to just above 22k). > > Yeah, but what about harmonics? For truly PRO work, analog should be > used. CD's came out as the poor mans quality stereo, it was a compromise > for high quality vinyl. Just as McDonalds is a poor compromise for a > quality restaurant. But with the proliferation of advertising, huge > product selection, the rising cost of the real quality goods; digital > and McDonalds soon became the norm. [snip] 44.1 was a compromise to get enough minutes on a CD, later when consumer DAT was introduced it wasn't needed to take care about the length, so they came with 48 KHz. Vinyl is another issue. I prefer vinyl, because records are similar to living beings. They get old, they get scratches, but there's no data loss, the mechanical principle allow it to play them with a needle on paper, there isn't the need to have a device with special encoding. The cover art is much nicer. Merry Christmas! Ralf _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
