Quote:
Originally Posted by JBroll  Have you actually tried a direct comparison between the two? |
Yes, I have.
Quote:
|
I shut the fuck up right after doing that, after making the mistake of arguing somewhere else that higher sample rates could help. Took two identical sources, one through a condenser and the other through a dynamic, into the DAW, ran them through an EQ and a compressor, and then yanked the 88.2 down to 44.1. I set the two next to each other and flipped a phase switch... volume was so low compared to the original it would be practically impossible to know it was there - I could record myself saying "I don't like Mother Teresa" at that volume and not have people try to throw hammers at me. And I was using budget gear - Audiophile 2496, hand-built preamp, i5, borrowed AT condenser, stock Reaper plugins.
|
Glad it worked for you.
Quote:
|
So my argument would be from actually using the technology you have to try it out, not showing off my recordings.
|
Since the end result is, in fact, a recording, and you're pretty vocal about the issue, one would gather that instead of saying "Andy Sneap does blah blah because he rules", you'd post up an A/B. Since I've never heard anything you've recorded, all I hear is you being condescending and namedropping as usual without any real evidence to back up your claims.
Quote:
|
This isn't condescending bullshit, this is sarcasm. Further, there's a much bigger resource cost behind 88.2 or 96 that could be put to use on better processing.
|
The limits set by your recording workstation don't have a thing to do with whether or not one is better than the other. Buy more ram.