hi Skamp
I think you quote me a bit out of context.
I am talking about the recording process,
i.e.multi track audio being recorded and mixed.
That is were the benefit of i.e.24/96 resolution is to be gained.
At the source.
When recording in 24/96 we are at mix down using less equalization and the reverb tails just sound so much better,than at 16/44 or 24/44.
Frans and I were the engineer/producer team behind all 10 of the official Carmen Gomes inc.albums.the 8 previous albums were recorded for the now no longer existing Byton/Via label.
These recordings were done in 24/44 and maybe even the first 2 in 16/44.
But when we went to 24/96 for the "Torn'',and the ''thousand Shades of Blue'' albums,everything(mixing and mastering just got so much easier).
The samples on our site from the different recordings we have made, are just simple mp3's,yet people comment on how good they sound,that is because the source was recorded at 24/96 MULTITRACK.
If I was to take one of the songs we are selling and do the test you suggest,I'm sure I would fail,even with a 320 or 256 mp3 thrown in for good fun, I'd probably fail.
But if I was to go back in the studio, bring back in the 4 musicians,put back up the 3 drum mic's,the double bass mic,the guitar mic,the vocal mic,the two room mic's.take just as much care when placing the microphones,that is listen, record,move the mic or mic's,listen record,repeating the process many times,driving the musicians crazy,then record the whole song in 16/44,mix it down in 16/44,and then compare the two,then I would tell the 24/96 file immediately.
I know this for sure because we did so.
We actually were very skeptical to the whole higher resolution thing in the beginning.It was also a question of money,to record higher resolution(24/96) we had to upgrade the computer we were using, if we wanted to record more than 8 tracks simultaneously,and being a very small company that was a expense we could do with out at that moment.But boy are we happy with the investment.(the musicians too)