44.1 kHz or 48 kHz?

[jamcat]

But does ATR MasterTape alias at 15ips?

[El°HYM]

Since this is one of my most beloved threads on kvr. Let me throw in another aspect.
https://dibiquadroaudio.com/oversampling-vs-aliasing

[DaniZzz79]

the higher the better

[YnJ]

I have to admit as the original starter of this thread I'm still pretty confused. I'm now considering just setting my interface to 96 kHz, as I record every track when I'm finished with it as a sound file anyway and mix it the old fashioned way, I suppose it wont matter when it comes to CPU, or are there other issues?

[shkr]

theoretically 96khz should always be better than 48khz. But is it? Some people here seem to forget that using nonlinear processess on 96khz sessions will generate lots of info beyond hearing range and if not filtered with ultrasonics filters will eventually generate IMD and aliasing. That's why mastering engineers working at 96khz tend to use ultrasonics filtering after nonlinear plugins. But what about mixing sessions with hundreds of channels and nonlinear plugins?
On the other hand - someone on gearspace made a crash test with lots of upsampled plugins (from vendors who know how to deal with oversampling properly) at extreme settings at 48khz and aliasing was literally non existent.
So there's really not just a simple solution.
If one does a lot of timestreaching - 96khz will yield better results. A lot of vst synths? 96khz probably better.
Recording heavy guitars? that's a different story. I myself prefer 48khz. 96khz comes kind of mellower, softer. But it probably depends on amps and miqs used.

One has to try it himself and don't trust online talk

[YnJ]

Recording heavy guitars? that's a different story. I myself prefer 48khz. 96khz comes kind of mellower, softer. But it probably depends on amps and miqs used.

One has to try it himself and don't trust online talk

Recording heavy guitars indeed, my question is if what sounds better on one track doesn't create issues which will make the total sound worse? I know 44.1 kHz works, as it is what I've always used, and it sounds decent enough. Can I record using 44.1 or 48 kHz and then change the settings to 96 or 192 kHz when mixing? I can try myself, I don't see any point repeating other peoples mistakes when I can learn from them though

[Philo999]

The annoying thing is that I have some hardware that will interface digitally with my Apollo twin at 44.1 KHz and some that will only do so at 48 KHz.

[kritikon]

I'm going to hedge my bets and split the difference between the two. I'll be recording at 46.05

[dogbig]

48 if your cpu can handle it

[RealWinner]

I usually just stick to 44.1 kHz

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

24bit/48Khz is Pro standard,if you are hobbyist may use 8 bit/11khz or something to tease neighbors,but pro quality of music production demand at least 24/48.

[RunBeerRun]

I use the highest settings on all sound qualities and my card says 192khz.

I'm on an i7 so cpu isn't really even affected. I used to use 44 on a dual core computer.

[Caine123]

i am still using 24bit & 48 khz but if i check spotify and various platforms they just use 44.1khz? and also i got a lot of 44.1khz samples, there are also some vsts which might sound different on various tests in pitch slightly between these 2. i think about getting back to 44.1khz

[jlgrimes11]

Either/or. It depends on the audio interface and software, but most likely you won't hear a big difference (or big difference) with either as most converters and software has gotten so good.

I will also say even back in my Alesis Adat days (when I was pretty sure I was at an age to hear ultra high frequencies and such), I didn't really notice a difference between 44.1 and 48. Maybe I could feel something but nothing I could really write down and describe.


That said every system will be difference, so different interfaces could sound different (although what I use I don't notice much). Plugins could work differently as well although I don't notice much. A bigger difference will be noticed when doubling sampling rates (which is noticeable especially when actually using the high sample rates to mix).

About the most noticeable improvement will be a slight increase in latency performance with 48k but maybe for alot this might not be noticeable as well.

I just kind of gravitate towards 48 now because it is a step above CDs and it is very rare for someone to ask for a CD now.

[DarkS474]

I always render at 192KHz / 32bit float. You can downsample from that for distribution but having the rendered mastered files at that sample rate and quantization is the best thing ever. Going up to 384KHz / 64 bit float might have some issues with some VST plugins that might not support that I think.