Recording at 96K (Pro Tools)

[william.bond55]

When you record at 96K, are you using more cpu power? Because Im just starting to record a big project and I can record at 96k, but as I only have a little macbook pro, I don't want it to be ruined by a cpu overload every second. THANKSSS!

[YYR123]

I don't believe this is a relevant factor to CPU power, I believe u will see more issues related to CPU power from all the plug in's/VI's u will b using on ur project - I don't believe it a contributing factor at least not in a major noticeable way

I do all my sessions at 96k and with a native setup it will definitely not be a instant downer with the Available Voices.......or DSP voices

[william.bond55]

Awesome, thanks!

[albee1952]

As compared to a 48K session, its double the audio file size that your audio drive will be handling, so use a fast recording drive(none of that "I'll just record it to the system drive" stuff). Personally, 48K works fine for me and my clients(but your needs may be different)

[chrisdee]

I have noticed that the "famous" pitch bend on reverb tails in Hall settings in the DVERB plugin is significantly less noticable at 96 kHz compared to 44 and 48 kHz. At 192 kHz the pitch bend effect is completly gone.

If this is a plugin bug or feature I don't know, but generally I think plugins like compressors, delays and reverb sound better at 96kHz than 44 or 48 kHz.

As others already have stated the most CPU hit comes from virtual instruments and plugins.

[WernerF]

Just an IMHO but, I've never seen any reason to squander resources on anything higher than 44. I only do records and I, and anyone else that I know who does the same, see no benefit from recording above that sample rate.

[Bill Denton]

As has been noted, disk speed is basically the only computer determinant involved...

Sound generally enters your interface as analog, and it is then your A/D converter that is tasked with "slicing it up" at the desired sample rate. Your interface then sends the digital signal to your computer, which then sends it to the hard drive.

The reverse happens when you play back your recorded audio, except you are using a D/A converter instead of an A/D converter. BTW: A=Analog, D=Digital.

Hope this helps...

[crizdee]

Originally Posted by william.bond55

When you record at 96K, are you using more cpu power? Because Im just starting to record a big project and I can record at 96k, but as I only have a little macbook pro, I don't want it to be ruined by a cpu overload every second. THANKSSS!

Hi,

Well plugins will require twice the amount of CPU over 44.1/48k

Disk space will be double.

Track count will be about halved.

available voices will be half.

you will need to double the hardware buffer size.

so yes it will use more CPU


Chris

[WernerF]

Exactly. Twice the resources for, as some people believe, no difference, or the almost the most imperceptible difference for rock music, in sound quality.

It's kind of a no brainer.

[william.bond55]

Okay thanks!! So if I wanted to change a sessions K rate, how would I go about doing so? Or is it not possible?