DaneelOlivaw
300 Club - QQ All-Star
After reading the first few of posts I skipped down & started writing the following, so apologies if this has been said already.
Compression and limiting are not the same thing folks.
Compression and average volume level also are not the same thing.
And raising the average volume level can be a good thing: that's because doing this enables the analog-to-digital convertor to use more of the sample word's bits, which in turn means more resolution because the more bits used, the finer the voltage steps the waveform is encoded with (this is a different issue than sampling frequency; actually, based on what I've read elsewhere many professionals think sample word length has - relatively speaking - more audible effect on sound than sampling frequency. Off-topic FYI: part of the sonic advantage of using higher sampling frequencies is related to the types of *filters* used with them, not because of the increased # of samples [as per Mr. Nyquist ]).
Compression and limiting are not the same thing folks.
Compression and average volume level also are not the same thing.
And raising the average volume level can be a good thing: that's because doing this enables the analog-to-digital convertor to use more of the sample word's bits, which in turn means more resolution because the more bits used, the finer the voltage steps the waveform is encoded with (this is a different issue than sampling frequency; actually, based on what I've read elsewhere many professionals think sample word length has - relatively speaking - more audible effect on sound than sampling frequency. Off-topic FYI: part of the sonic advantage of using higher sampling frequencies is related to the types of *filters* used with them, not because of the increased # of samples [as per Mr. Nyquist ]).