In Reply to: Actually. . . posted by Chris from Lafayette on May 20, 2010 at 09:21:40:
and meant "sample rate" not "bit rate", like in the subsequent post.
I guess what I'm saying is that I tend to like higher sample rates. I'd almost certainly rather have 16/96 (or 20/96) if I could get it over 24/48, if we have to keep the bit-rate lower compared to 24/96 or 24/192. I'm not overly impressed by 24/48 over CD myself for the type of music I listen to, both are adequate though, "more" would be nice.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- I mis-spoke there - cfraser 12:22:54 05/20/10 (1)
- samples greater than bits - Joe Murphy Jr 21:57:51 05/20/10 (0)