Sample Rate Debate

[TobiKeymaster]

Thanks for the links! Video is really interesting - article will have to wait until my dyslexic brain has had some sleep 😉

Currently debating which Sample Rate / Bit depth to use... gonna run some tests with my system later this week.

Another video I came across on youtube, covers some similar ideas (though from the Audiophile point of view) : MQA part 1; Why 24 bit 192 kHz audio?

'Sound and Recording - Applications and Theory' makes an interesting point about 24bit recording, 'So called 24 bit converters are indeed available today, but their audio performance is strongly dependent upon the stability of the timing clock, electrical environment, analog stages, grounding and other issues.' (p227)

Testing your system to find what suits it best, seems like the way to go...

[camoe]

96 all the way. I'd go 192 if my system could handle it. It's a quite obvious difference to me between 48 and 96 kHz.

[chris massaParticipant]

All at 96 kHz what kind of CPU power(quad,hex,eight core) are you using? How many tracks and what is your plugin count? Are you then using DSP cards or external DSP power?

[Mark WarnerParticipant]

When I first started working with DAW's I used 96KHz 32bit mainly because a lot of what I was working on was tape to digital transfers. I maintain that I can hear a difference in quality between 96KHz and 48/44.1KHz on tape transfers but I have switched to using 48KHz/24 for new recording work because I do not have to reference back to original work on new recordings. The exception to that is that, if I know something is to be released on vinyl I will again use 96KHz/24 or 32bit where (or in case) the mastering and cutting are required at 96KHz/24. All work destined for digital or CD release is recorded and worked on at 48KHz/24bit. The benefit of not using 96KHz all the time is that is saves on disk storage and file transfer times on backups and sending out for mastering etc. Masters I usually ask to come back in both 44.1/16(Red Book) for CD and 44.1/24. This is because digital aggregation and distributions services prefer 44.1/24 for their automated systems (at this time) to make the many formats from such as .wav, .aiff, or .flac, MP3(320) etc. They offer the choice to the customers in many cases and need to work from high quality and given that once of the choices is WAV 44.1/24 then giving them the best quality is always the way to go. Some aggregators, I believe, are starting to accept 48/24 and there maybe some asking for still higher but I am not in a rush to go back to working solely on 96KHz just yet.
Cheers - Mark

• This reply was modified 8 years ago by Mark Warner.

[Author]

Posts