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. I've come across some examples on the net 
myself.
>
> [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 certainly illustrated the dangers of remastering engineers not really 
understanding all the ins and outs of the task.

Thanks

Alan