no, there is another....
the prophecy states, that on page 30, there will be one who brings balance.
44.1 kHz or 48 kHz?
-
- addled muppet weed
- 106019 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
the prophecy states, that on page 30, there will be one who brings balance.
-
- KVRAF
- 2244 posts since 21 Nov, 2015
The art of knowing is knowing what to ignore.
-
- Boss Lovin' DR
- 12685 posts since 15 Mar, 2002 from the grimness of yorkshire
Compromise and split the difference - 46.05.
-
- KVRAF
- 2244 posts since 21 Nov, 2015
The first Digital Multitracker (3M) already used 50 kHz... but this was in 1978. 
The art of knowing is knowing what to ignore.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 106019 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
-
- KVRAF
- 2244 posts since 21 Nov, 2015
The art of knowing is knowing what to ignore.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 106019 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
me too
"if" i bother with another "album" i will look at going for a 12" vinyl record release only! f**k digital (except for the samplers
)
"if" i bother with another "album" i will look at going for a 12" vinyl record release only! f**k digital (except for the samplers
)-
- KVRAF
- 5544 posts since 2 Sep, 2019
This goes back to what I said about ADAT and DASH. They were digital storage. All of the mixing, processing, and manipulation all happened in the analogue domain. Math wasn't being performed directly on the digital audio. Bits weren't being changed, voltage was.
When the digital tape was played back, it was decoded back to analogue, so digital artifacting never got a chance to accumulate.
THIS MUSIC HAS BEEN MIXED TO BE PLAYED LOUD SO TURN IT UP
-
- KVRAF
- 2244 posts since 21 Nov, 2015
I am actually still buying cassettes, brother vurt. Also looking for a pair of LA-4's.
The art of knowing is knowing what to ignore.
-
- KVRAF
- 7891 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
Oh the irony. I need to put preamp distortion on every one of my pristine digitally recorded channels from nice clean digital sources, because obviously distortion makes thing clearer, wider and more present ( a quote from somebody nearby here), but I should do it subtly so that I can't hear it. But to do this I need to work and record at 8000MHz (which doesn't add anything to my CPU at all, because I've bought more plugins to counteract the upsampling I've chosen to inflict on myself) to mitigate the effects of aliasing caused by me adding distortion to everything I do, but this particular distortion is really bad even though it's so subtle that I can't hear it. Not like good dirty inaudible distortion though.
I do wonder if Churchill's infamous quote about pulling oneself up by one's own bootstraps being a f**king stupid and impossible thing to do might apply here.
1. Distortion is good. Use it everywhere.
2. Distortion will cause aliasing.
3. Aliasing is bad.
4. Aliasing is distortion.
5. Distortion is bad.
6. Stratospheric sampling rate to stop aliasing.
I think I have a solution.
1. Don't make distortion.
Personally, I like my 1 step. Seems easier to me.
Q. When I poke myself in the eye it hurts.
A. Don't poke your eye.
I do wonder if Churchill's infamous quote about pulling oneself up by one's own bootstraps being a f**king stupid and impossible thing to do might apply here.
1. Distortion is good. Use it everywhere.
2. Distortion will cause aliasing.
3. Aliasing is bad.
4. Aliasing is distortion.
5. Distortion is bad.
6. Stratospheric sampling rate to stop aliasing.
I think I have a solution.
1. Don't make distortion.
Personally, I like my 1 step. Seems easier to me.
Q. When I poke myself in the eye it hurts.
A. Don't poke your eye.
Last edited by kritikon on Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 106019 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
-
- addled muppet weed
- 106019 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
