Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 19:26:14 07/26/09 (72)

• Have any of you read the Audio Critic Double/Blind study.... - deskducker 00:26:17 07/31/09 (36)
• Better duck under that desk; - Kristian 08:54:55 07/31/09 (35)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - deskducker 10:32:13 07/31/09 (34)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Kristian 10:52:43 07/31/09 (33)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 22:46:23 07/31/09 (31)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 04:35:48 08/1/09 (30)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 09:11:52 08/1/09 (29)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 10:13:02 08/1/09 (28)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 20:01:03 08/1/09 (27)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 06:00:31 08/2/09 (26)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 06:48:18 08/2/09 (25)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 07:16:17 08/2/09 (24)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 18:22:52 08/2/09 (23)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 01:05:50 08/3/09 (22)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 04:06:20 08/3/09 (21)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 04:40:30 08/3/09 (20)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:08:53 08/3/09 (19)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 07:56:07 08/3/09 (18)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 12:09:11 08/3/09 (17)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 14:42:51 08/3/09 (16)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 18:27:33 08/3/09 (15)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 19:46:06 08/3/09 (14)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:24:51 08/4/09 (0)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 02:55:41 08/4/09 (12)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Tony Lauck 17:29:58 08/5/09 (0)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:05:49 08/4/09 (7)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 19:12:49 08/5/09 (4)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 19:46:58 08/5/09 (3)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 20:00:35 08/5/09 (2)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 03:56:22 08/6/09 (1)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 07:50:41 08/6/09 (0)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Tony Lauck 17:40:32 08/5/09 (1)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 19:17:37 08/5/09 (0)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 04:13:36 08/4/09 (2)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 07:59:20 08/5/09 (1)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 23:19:23 08/5/09 (0)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 06:26:29 08/10/09 (0)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 06:50:25 08/10/09 (0)
• RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 18:15:04 07/31/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 07:44:51 07/29/09 (14)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Ryelands 09:11:05 07/29/09 (12)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 10:41:27 07/29/09 (11)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 13:04:49 07/29/09 (10)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 14:52:26 07/29/09 (9)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 22:40:02 07/29/09 (8)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Ryelands 02:29:20 07/30/09 (7)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 04:09:24 07/30/09 (6)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 08:57:45 07/30/09 (3)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 09:53:13 07/30/09 (1)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 13:47:57 07/30/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 09:16:45 07/30/09 (0)
• I second the agreement... - Phelonious Ponk 07:48:46 07/30/09 (0)
• Completely agree with you. nt - drrd 07:03:18 07/30/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 09:04:11 07/29/09 (0)
• Temporal resolution and RBCD - cics 13:22:50 07/28/09 (1)
• RE: Temporal resolution and RBCD - Ryelands 04:37:17 07/29/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 09:51:02 07/28/09 (6)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Ryelands 11:09:45 07/28/09 (3)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 11:06:06 07/29/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - secretsquirrel 03:57:11 12/4/09 (0)
• Get out while you still have time! - Ryelands 06:50:55 12/4/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 06:42:30 07/29/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 07/28/0921:14:20 07/28/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 10:34:26 07/28/09 (1)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 21:20:55 07/28/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Ryelands 03:01:40 07/28/09 (0)
• This is silly - audiozorro 09:05:51 07/27/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - mls-stl 20:11:35 07/26/09 (8)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - drrd 03:27:22 07/27/09 (7)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - AstroD 00:00:32 07/28/09 (5)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - joeljoel1947 09:01:16 07/29/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 07:51:15 07/28/09 (3)
• another interesting test - Werner 22:45:55 07/29/09 (1)
• RE: another interesting test - Tony Lauck 07:16:45 07/30/09 (0)
• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - AstroD 16:33:02 07/28/09 (0)
• "It's not really that obvious" - mls-stl 10:53:45 07/27/09 (0)

Follow Ups

• RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 07/28/0921:14:20 07/28/09 (0)