Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Junior Varsity
Uli Behringer of The Music Group Q&A
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jeff Babcock" data-source="post: 59721" data-attributes="member: 46"><p>Re: Uli Behringer of The Music Group Q&A</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Hi Michael,</p><p>Certainly the technical advantages are there as you have nicely indicated. My point is that companies' marketing usually ignores the latency issue etc and pitch 96kHz as a selling feature most typically in terms of implying better sound quality, which while possible, is "small potatoes" in the broad scheme of the final end result. In the case of an X32, burning up half of the I/O on the device simply to gain 96kHz would be a really poor tradeoff with nearly irrelevant benefit to sound quality for most applications.</p><p></p><p>I know you already know this (but I'll say it for the multitude of users out there who are blinded by the marketing machine) - many assume that any 96kHz product must sound better than one at 48. (Often the same people who believe line arrays are always superior). This is absolutely not the case, and even if it were, the electronic part of sound reproduction has much much much much much much much much much less impact on sound quality than physical things like capsules, drivers, and humans. The users who get the best results are usually the ones who understand this.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jeff Babcock, post: 59721, member: 46"] Re: Uli Behringer of The Music Group Q&A Hi Michael, Certainly the technical advantages are there as you have nicely indicated. My point is that companies' marketing usually ignores the latency issue etc and pitch 96kHz as a selling feature most typically in terms of implying better sound quality, which while possible, is "small potatoes" in the broad scheme of the final end result. In the case of an X32, burning up half of the I/O on the device simply to gain 96kHz would be a really poor tradeoff with nearly irrelevant benefit to sound quality for most applications. I know you already know this (but I'll say it for the multitude of users out there who are blinded by the marketing machine) - many assume that any 96kHz product must sound better than one at 48. (Often the same people who believe line arrays are always superior). This is absolutely not the case, and even if it were, the electronic part of sound reproduction has much much much much much much much much much less impact on sound quality than physical things like capsules, drivers, and humans. The users who get the best results are usually the ones who understand this. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Junior Varsity
Uli Behringer of The Music Group Q&A
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!