You are reading a single comment by @Airhead and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
Airhead
Dramatic_Hammer
I'm not trying to have the most neckbeard argument ever but having just looked it up, pro tools only started supporting 96khz (and 192) in 2002... Admittedly that was 17 years ago but there was plenty of music digitally recorded with it before then.
Apparently Herp Alberts album rise was recorded at 96k in 1979 though, so I guess you're right about how long it's been around!
My point with tape is that often the way things were recorded (the compression has a low-pass effect) means there's not a lot going on to require massive oversampling (although iirc there can be separate issues with the bias tone).
I get that converters aren't created equal and oversampling will reduce audible artifacts so if you've got the gear, great go for 96/24 but in general if something was recorded (or remastered) for CD, you're getting the 'correct' version at 44.1/16 and 192 is like playing a DVD on a 4k TV with no upscaling trickery.