Date:         Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:18:45 -0800
Reply-To:     Al Knoll <anasasi@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Al Knoll <anasasi@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Friday topic: MP3s in a vanagon?
Comments: To: PB <pbrattan@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:  <699b6e3f1002271156t127d2e34s5719f7e789f4084f@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

One more little bit about all this.  Each step in the translation from live
to digital loses some audio accuracy, the more conversions the more that is
irrevocably lost.  So for the best source, rip at the highest possible
bitrate.  Water it down appropriately later on.

Audio imaging is really not very different from digital imaging, in both
noise and quality of source is paramount.  A 12MP camera with a 1/4" imaging
device will not produce as good an image as a 5MP camera with a 1/2" imaging
device mainly because of inherent "engine noise".  For pictures of your cat
drinking out of the toilet it probably doesn't matter but for the last light
on horsetail falls earlier this month it does.  For recording the faint
sounds of a wolf howl in other wise silent Idaho, very little will reproduce
the original sound to your satisfaction, at best only a reference to the
"kodachrome of the mind".  For recording the sound of the cat drinking,
accuracy may not be all that important.

The dynamic range of film is still somewhat better than commonly available
digital cameras.  The dynamic range of  1/2 inch two track master tape at 15
IPS is still somewhat better than CD quality.

However if you can't detect the difference personally then for personal use
it doesn't matter.  Use the best source you can, record at the highest
accuracy you have available.  Anything else in the playback system can be
upgraded to your liking later on down the road, the source cannot be
improved.

Macho B was murdered.  Apolo Anton Ohno was robbed.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Pensionerd