Quote:

Quote:

They need to be understood without some ancient tape jockey babbling about headroom and frequency response.



Hi, all. I think I just recognized myself, there!

Actually, I completely agree with the 16/24 argument, but I think that, sometimes, we assume that better equipment makes better recordings, without acknowledging the difference made by the skill of the operator.

In my view, the differences between 16/24 are hard to detect, whilst the skill of the operator makes a huge difference. Some of us who remember working with tape, when you had a noise floor you could measure on the VUs and nothing was tracked without a compressor to preserve the s/n ratio without switching in the Dolbys, are quite happy to stick with 16 bit.

Just sayin....

ROG.







I always find these 16/24 discussions amusing. I started out with a Tascam Portastudio 144 in 1979 (4-track/cassette). You want to talk about noise floor?


I agree with ROG - the gear will not make you a better operator. It will, however, remove a lot of the sonic obstacles that plagued the "good old days".



Regards,


Bob

Dyslectics Untie!


https://90dbband.bandcamp.com/

https://soundcloud.com/90-db

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCm_3mpivKYV7T7XFJmXL-GA