Academy Dashboard Forum Production Recording Techniques Sample Rate for Tracking Reply To: Sample Rate for Tracking


    Of course the music (creative ideas, good recordings, production, mixing) should be by far the most important part of any discussion related to technology, equipment and the like. But: since we have the technology at hand and 96khz/24bit is nowadays a format widely and easily supported by most interfaces, computers and DAWs, it is necessary to decide if I want to use it or not (and stick to lower sample and bit rates). So I think the questions here are certainly relevant when you're serious about audio recording and processing, whether it's for your own music or that of other people.

    I personally find 96khz/24bit to sound better - more open, more details, more presence, etc. One explanation of that seems to lie with the issue of anti-aliasing, which apparently works better at 96khz, because the low-pass filter can slope off much slower in the high end (which is theoretically not audible, but still seems to make a difference in the audio processing. Here's a pretty consistent explanation of that (which can also be found in other places):

    So for now I think I will stick to that format for both recording and mixing, and then also exporting 96/24 wav files, despite the additional disk space and processing power required (my CPU can handle it rather well).

    I recently subcribed to the audio streaming service TIDAL which offers audio streaming like Spotify but in Hifi and even MASTER quality (usually 96/24). This is of course a major difference compared to Spotify 320kbit files, but I even think that there's discernible differences between Hifi (44.1/16) and Master quality. The listening pleasure is definitely huge. I recommend everyone to check out this streaming service, you can do 1 month for free (but beware, you might keep your subcription after that :).