[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 1/21/2017 7:28 PM, wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote: "And if your paying client asks for a particular sample rate, you
should be prepared to use it. "

That is, if said paying client is even remotely
as concerned with sampling rate(or other
technical matters) as they are with laying
down a good effort in as few takes as possible.

It's no more difficult to record at 2x sample rate, but if that's what
the client asks for, that's what he'll get. Getting good recordings is
his job at whatever sample rate. I'll concede that some of them don't
know what sample rate means, but they may have read that 96 kHz is good,
or have been asked by the people who are paying the bills to get 96 kHz
recordings because it's company policy, or the recording you're making
will be part of a project with recordings coming in from other places,
and if they're all at the same sample rate, it's easier to combine them
into a CD than if the recordings were at multiple sample rates.

When we were using tape, doubling the tape speed meant using twice as
much tape, which could make a big dent in the project's budget.
Accommodating files at 2x sample rate on a disk drive may not add any
cost at all, or maybe only a few bucks. On the other hand, when you're
burning up tape twice as fast, you might not want to keep all of those
takes that might have a better word in them than your primary take. That
could save some time if you're not afraid to make a decision.




--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then