Sampling frequency on Radio programmes

[Alan Milewczyk]

On 19/04/2015 14:18, Jim web wrote:
> In article <55339C51.9040203 at soulman1949.com>,
>     Alan Milewczyk <alan at soulman1949.com> wrote:
>>> The endgame should be that we can now all get better quality 48k.
>> I would have thought that the difference in audio quality between 44k1
>> and 48k would be marginal, if at all discernible to the human ear.
> Yes. The difference is generally likely to be somewhere between slight and
> undetectable *if the conversion is done well*. However from the POV of the
> audiophile engineer *any* conversion can be expected to degrade the results
> by losing some info. Just a question of degree. So best to avoid them if
> you can.
Yes I agree, best left alone.
>
> [1] For some examples of how digital 'improvements' can muck up audio, have
> a look at http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/HealthCheck/CD.html OK, this is
> from Audio CDs but it shows what can go on.
>
Fascinating article, even though some of the detail went over my head, 
it illustrated the dangers where remastering engineers don't really 
understand all the ins and outs.

Thanks

Alan