Johnny Don't!
New member
Ok J, just trying to keep "technical" terms as pure as possible. Lots of people "know what you mean" but the newbs won't. I like to start them off a'right? You are talking about Word Length and it is often wrongly stated as "bit rate". "Resolution" is of course about 6dB per bit and does not change with word length nor sample rate.
Ha, I dig yer style; I like yer moves. Haha. I am usually VERY particular about words in general, but especially technical terms...it seems that "resolution" has become the umbrella term for "digital recording quality." I see and hear it used by EVERYONE, literally everyone: I've articles from guys Chris Lord Algae where he uses the term (or doesn't bother correcting the interviewer), and I hear just about every engineer in every Chicago studio I work in using it: "What reso are you at? Make sure its 88.2/24." Hell, the drummer in one of my bands is an electrical engineer at Shure up north of me and even HE uses it. Haha.
There has been a huge debate everywhere, forever whether sample rates above 44.1/48kHz are worthwhile. There seems to be agreement that in SOME circumstances higher rates give a marginal improvement on some content but for most of us, most of the time, bog S rates are fine.
Well...as you probably would agree, the low end is typically the hardest part of a mix to get "right." I find that if I track & mix at 88.2/24 as opposed to 44.1/24 (or even 16...yuck), I have an easier time dealing with the low end, much like I do when I'm working with tape. In terms of high end stuff, most listeners have destroyed most of their range above 15-16k anyway...and like the popular recording/musicians' meme shows, we're all spending TONS of money on great mics and mic pres and tube gear and monitors and room treatments...only to have most people download the tune in mp3 format at 192kpbs and listen on shitty Apple earbuds. Hahahahaha. So maybe we should just go back to acetone discs. ;-)
But. like "rms" bloody watts, I am losing the battle I think!
Yes, the loudness war blows goats; I realized the other day it probably has a lot to do with shortened attention spans.
BTW that interface MUST be old! Even my old M-A PCI card was 24 NINETYSIX!
Nah, not that old, just not that great. HAHAHAHAHAH see what I mean??? I just jumped on Sweetwater's site to verify I had the specs right on my old interface, and they it list as "24-bit/96kHz resolution." I shit you not.
I should clarify, however: it wasn't the lack of higher quality "resolutions" on the old interface; it was the revealing of the low-quality pres at the higher "resolutions" that was the issue.
See ya around, Daddio, and keep fighting the accurate terminology fight!!