Tracking at 24/96 vs 24/48
On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 7:18:19 AM UTC-6, Scott Dorsey wrote:
James Price wrote:
Do you think it's the norm for most studios to track at 24/96 or 24/48?
Or is it a mixed bag?
If the converters are perfect, the only thing the higher sampling rate buys
you is added bandwidth.
So, there are three reasons to use the higher sampling rate:
1. You are trying to record ultrasonics for later analysis that may make them
audible or create audible effects from them. Say you are recording bird
song for analysis or machine vibrations or you're making dubs of LPs that
will later go through noise reduction which will benefit from the
ultrasonic content for pop detection.
On a side note, is the ability to record at 24/96 limited by the frequency response of the microphone? Wouldn't you need a mic that can capture audio above 22kHz?
|