yeah...the comparision was interesting,
but did you read on? What I got from the test responses where that the "blindfolded" people could
sometimes tell a difference, but
sometimes changed their minds on what they had just heard when listening to the same thing again. Additionally, the consensus seems that although the "golden ears" could hear the difference, even after converted back to 16/44.1, there was
no conclusion which sounded best...just different. Personally, when details are so small like that, the humidity of the day effects the aural response more, imo
. I feel laboring over sonic details so small like these, is like spinning your wheels after that last .1%, when better effort should just be given to other more important items, such as mic technique, performance, arrangements, optimizing signal paths with correct gain structure, writing, and of course, picking and drinking the "correct" beer
I believe mic selection is starting to approach that arena also, when used in home studios with "consumer" quality playback systems. Yeah..there's a difference, but you gotta be toooo anal, if that becomes your goal, rather than the music, itself.
oh..btw, I listened to the clips back on my urei 813c's and jbl4311's, at decent levels, and felt the differences were too insignificant to worry about. If you can hear it, and think it makes a BIG difference...hey go for.
One advantage of recording at 24 bit, I will give, is for processing...after several "alterings thru processing", the track is best left at 24bit...then converted AT THE END...but we all know that...right
gotta make me a few cases to avoid nicking and scratching the shit out of my stuff, if not worse. to top it off, we have to take our own drum kit, since the one my friend has is crap.
