On Tue, 2013-04-02 at 18:16 -0700, Len Ovens wrote: > On Tue, April 2, 2013 7:36 am, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-04-02 at 16:33 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > >> On Tue, 2013-04-02 at 15:34 +0200, Peder Hedlund wrote: > >> > Your car can probably do 140 mph even though you never go that fast. > >> > Being able to use the card in 192 kHz probably doesn't cost that much > >> > extra for the manufacturer and I guess the marketing department really > >> > loves being able to use it in the advertising. > >> > >> Yes, it's the second sentence :D > >> http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_hdspe_aio.php . > > RME has no choice really. If they want their gear to be used to make > bluray sound tracks, they have to support 192k. This is the certification > needed by equipment for that use. True, the sound is not any better than > if the studio used 48k and resampled the finished product to 192k (maybe > worse). but this is not about sound quality or RME doing marketing... it > is Hollywood doing the marketing... People are convinced it does sound better, http://forum.dvdtalk.com/hd-talk/578983-more-96-192khz-blurays-please.html , I don't think they are all wrong. Perhaps the players really do sound better at 192 KHz, because of better matching filters or what ever, just to have new option to sell new products. Perhaps a selling trick of the industry. I don't own blurays and bluray players, I've got no idea how they do sound. Btw. I don't follow all new consumer things. I very late bought my first CD player and only own a donated DVD player, I rarely use. And I only bought DAT, not all the other digital things like MDs etc.. Perhaps I should try a recording at 192 KHz :D. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
