Re: [ARSCLIST] Mastering to WAV

[Tom Fine <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Paul:

Transfer direct digital (SPDIF or TOSlink) at 48K and then save-as the files
at 44.1. Then you have a standard CD-audio file, which is more than fine for
spoken-word and you're stored at a very universal standard. 48K may provide
marginally better fidelity for wide-spectrum music but it's not a playback
format that caught on much beyond DATs. I would bet this material will get
zero audible benefit from a high-resolution transfer and that will eat up
storage space. Go to 44.1 and you can immediately burn audio CD's and also
data CD's with the WAV files, assuring almost universal accessibility into
the foreseeable.

One man's opinion, etc

-- Tom Fine


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Tombleson" <pr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:38 AM
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Mastering to WAV


With the ongoing discussion about bit rate, etc for MP3, I was wondering
about another question regarding mastering rate for WAV files.
I have a system (Pro Tools 5.1.1 with  888 I/O) that is older and therefore
does not allow mastering higher than 48k @24 bit depth.
My question therefore is which would be the more prudent settings to master
to WAV based on my limited equipment situation and disk space and that 98
percent of the mastering would be for narration material from DAT tapes
recorded at 48k...

44.1 at 16
44.1 at 24
or 48 at 24.

I ask this because I remember reading or hearing somewhere that using 44.1k
maybe better than using 48k due to some mathematical reason for future
transfers. I of course am more than willing to accept I misunderstood or
misread the situation. But then this is what the LIST is for no doubt to
enlighten or correct errors....LOL

I thank you for your time in this regard

Paul Tombleson