Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:19:40 +0100 From: Thomas Zander <thomas.e.zander@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why 24/192kHz sound is not a solution. Message-ID: <CAFU734wQ0YikLwhCE5%2Bhri7W5V1pHhZWk1tVgbhgD299wvi9Mw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAA7C2qjCbe_yJMCpKFj67aXtSBiWC%2BGwHMkACcerUGB3bWo1pg@mail.gmail.com> References: <1354723094926-5766828.post@n5.nabble.com> <CAA7C2qjCbe_yJMCpKFj67aXtSBiWC%2BGwHMkACcerUGB3bWo1pg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 6:47 PM, VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> wrote: >> http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html > > I don't know that using the mailing list to post links to articles is > appropriate, but 24/192 does matter when it comes to processing. Why should this be inappropriate? The article has a clear focus on the 24/192 topic and freebsd-multimedia@ is a place to discuss how FreeBSD should deal with this. IMHO there is nothing wrong with that. In my opinion there is one answer: If the sound chip accepts 24/192, then our sound system should be able to use this capability. Riggs
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFU734wQ0YikLwhCE5%2Bhri7W5V1pHhZWk1tVgbhgD299wvi9Mw>