Mastering session question

[RichrdC]

I've watched a few videos about mastering and a question I have has to do with sample rates and bit sizes.. I can understand why you'd want to create a mastering template with the same sample and bit rates as your sessions. First off, since I haven't really delved into what the rates really mean, can someone just give a quick oversight? I think going from 44khz to 96khz would mean more data per period of time? Higher quality? And would the bit size, going from 16 to 24 say, mean the same thing, capturing more data? I suppose I could research this for sure, but I just thought to ask right this minute. (Slow couple minutes at the office!) If I've recorded a session in 44hz, 16 bits, is there any reason to bounce it into 96khz, 24 bits, in order to then master at the higher rates?

[YYR123]

24bit use it always - except when going down to CD
More headroom - ie less chance of audio distortion.......Cleaner signal

sampling rate is a bit more debateable.....most people say it's not worth it to record at anyhigher sampling rate than 44.1 (except for video obviously) that is for any amount of percieved nuance in quality (however slight)in the higher rates..........is neglible to your ears.

that being said ask me why I record @ 96k - ???? IDK maybe my BFD2 sounds better???? can't tell - i just do.

End all.....Sampling rate is debateable 24bit is not......

Even if you want to go to CD later - record 24bit first.

[YYR123]

if your bringing those sessions in to master....yes import them into a 24bit session.....Like i said earlier probably not worth it to change the sampling rate.....leave it at 44.1k but to each his own......

[Dism]

Originally Posted by RichrdC

I think going from 44khz to 96khz would mean more data per period of time? Higher quality? And would the bit size, going from 16 to 24 say, mean the same thing, capturing more data?

Correct. It also means more disk space used, and higher CPU usage. If you don't have a well treated room and nice monitors, I doubt you'd hear much of a difference anyway.

Originally Posted by RichrdC

If I've recorded a session in 44hz, 16 bits, is there any reason to bounce it into 96khz, 24 bits, in order to then master at the higher rates?

No. If you've already recorded at 44.1/16, master at 44.1/16. There's no reason to up sample as it certainly won't add any detail that isn't there.

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by Dism

No. If you've already recorded at 44.1/16, master at 44.1/16. There's no reason to up sample as it certainly won't add any detail that isn't there.

Yeah Dan but if he wants to master it he wants to eq and compress to bring up the levels.....to "Radio ready" levels... He would be greatly aided by having the matering session at 24bit b/c of the extra headroom......to compress the originals.....

True it wont' make the recordings any better but the extra headroom of 24bit would be usefull to Compress - would it not - mon ami

[RichrdC]

Just wanted to say thank you to you both for the comments.. It's great to have knowledgeable folks available to clear things up for the hobbyists of the world.. Now, all we need is the next big hit tune that everyone will hum while driving for the next couple decades!!! Thanks again YYR123 and Dism..

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by RichrdC

..... for the hobbyists of the world.. Now, all we need is the next big hit tune that everyone will hum while driving for the next couple decades!!!

We r all hobby'rs in some form - many more financially entrenched than others - most regular people think we are Craiz'd lunies constantly buying gear and searching for that golden mic pre - that killer tone and a way to make ur mix sound like it was mixed on an 100k analog desk !!! 😊😊😊