noquarter1983

Not true. Myself and another guy ran the same mic into 2 identical Protools systems as a test a bout 3 years ago. The systems were both Digidesign 002's into the same version of PTLE on Macs. We got a lend of a 1 in, 2 out xlr splitter from another friend and strummed a guitar for a while into a Se Gemini mic. We ran the test repeatedly running 48kHZ and 96kHz on both machines and thru both sides of the splitter box just to be sure. The recordings in 96kHz returned a markedly more spacious, defined and 'deeper' recording of the source on playback thru a pair of Genelec monitors. I still use 48kHz on everything for ease of memory and disk usage and it sounds great but what you are saying there about higher sample rates is total falsehood, 96kHZ gives you a better recording if you can afford the hardware. you are victim to a placebo effect you knew which one was the higher resolution so you naturally hear it to be better. You need a blind test to find a real result.

The whole .mp3 thing is interesting. I mean each successive format has offered higher resolution, but with mp3 we seem to be taking a step backwards. Everyone here seems to care a lot about sound quality and they should. I know I do. But for some reason the lay person has obviously decided that mp3 is good enough for them. Anyways, hard drives are dirt cheap these days. I store everything in a lossless format. By the way is there any sites that offer lossless or even higher resolution downloads. There is obviously a demand for these types of download, but I heard of any. No every generation of music was about convenience and access as well CDs made skipping tracks easier than cassette tapes. MP3s mean people can choose exactly which tracks they want and which they don't. So in a sense, mp3s are a step forward in the convenience path.

try this: 57 on the grill, off axis then put the ksm27 back a bit This gives a nice warm sound to guitar recordings