[ProAudio] The High-Resolution Challenge

[Dan Lavry]

The paper you send is stating clearly that they don't know the reason to the conclusing they made.Using specific gear means having many variables that can change the outcome. It is not good enough to form generalizations. My friend from Sony and his team did a extensive comparisons between 96 and 192KHz, they did it for internal use, but he told me that 96khz was the prfered one.I don't have to take sides. But let me point out that my statements were correct, free of any variables. I speak EE and math, and non linearity is generally bad. I already said a lot about the subject (years ago) in my paper Sampling Theory. I added the issue of non linearity when someone here sugested here that the energy above audio frequencies does not matter. How much it matters? Again, I leave that to the recording and mastering people. (Personaly, I don't think it should be dismissed).RegardsDan LavrySent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: "Goran Finnberg mastering at telia.com" <mastering at telia.com> 
Date: 2/13/20  2:17 PM  (GMT-08:00) 
To: Dan Lavry <dan at lavryengineering.com>, proaudio at bach.pgm.com 
Subject: The High-Resolution Challenge 

Dan Lavry:>So why 192 kHz or higher? If you can't hear it, and your dog can't either...https://web.archive.org/web/20030407091305if_/http://www.dcsltd.co.uk:80/papers/effects.pdf---------Best regards,Goran FinnbergThe Mastering Room ABGoteborgSwedenE-mail: mastering at telia.comLearn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough tomake them all yourself.    -   John Luther(\__/)(='.'=)(")_(") Aron, VovVov, Nero & Smurfen:RIP
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bach.pgm.com/pipermail/proaudio/attachments/20200213/69cc9c08/attachment.html>