Sample Rate for professionals

[Popmeise]

Hello,

I have read different threads and opinions: What is the best sample-rate? 44.1, 48, 96 or 196 kHz? 16 Bit or 24 Bit?

I have read, that for CD 44.1kHz/16Bit is okay for music, cause a CD doesn't need more. On the other way I think YOLO, so if my songs will be good, it was a shame, if I had to less quality.
But if I make good quality-songs (for example in 96 kHz/24Bit) I have read, that the adapiton to CD could be worse than if I would have made my songs directly in 44.1kHz/16Bit.

Can you tell me, what the professional studios make? David Guetta, Robby Williams, etc...? I just want to have the right settings for my songs.

[clausiii]

Well, you open pandora’s box right now ;-)
So many opinions will come up in this thread.
IMHO i would also pick 96/24, conversion to 44.1/16 isn‘t that bad, it’s good nowadays! And who knows what the future brings? Maybe 96/24 is the new standard anytime soon?
Make some tests for yourself, convert a 96/24 mix to 44.1/16 and hear if you’re satisfied with it.
Compare it with a session done with 44.1/24.
just listen!

[Drew Mazurek]

Same answer I always give.......

make records @ 16/44.1 that compete the "big boys", then worry about this.

[albee1952]

Can of worms? Yep I work almost exclusively at 24 bit/48K. Audio for video often ends up there(reason #1). Higher sample rates CAN sound better*** but consider how many hit records in the late eighties, into the nineties that were done on ADAT Reason #2; I recommend 48K as the lowest sample rate as it pushes the nyquist filter a bit higher(than 44.1) so any associated phase shift also gets pushed higher. Yes, I know that most people don't hear those frequencies, but the phase shift can still have an affect on the high end sound quality(just my opinion, without empirical evidence)

*** I say "CAN" because a higher sample rate won't make up for a bad recording, a bad song or a bad performance. I'll take a decent recording of a great song and performance, over a perfect recording of crap, any day

[Southsidemusic]

Seriously doubt the "record buying public of today" would hear any difference as they listen often on $20 earbuds or worse. Crappy car stereos optimized by deaf people to sound as loud as humanly possible and yes, that includes the distortion that comes with that bass vibrations hahaha ... we all want our music to sound GREAT as possible but after over ten years writing and producing for A-Listers we have stopped trying and make it and 48/24 and 44.1/16 since it will come out that way anyhooo after mastering and all the Farking Bad Stupid Soundkilling compression on radio and the web especially utube and Vimeo where most of our music end up from music videos and live stuff by the artists.

All IMHO of course

Unfortunately when we record with the new Slate VMS (which do sound EXACTLY like our hardware Sony800G) requires we record in 96 as that would be the optimum for latency but we still record 48/24 and no one at the labels havesaid anything ever and the Billboard agree with the songs we produced and sold to big artists so as Clausiii said in the forst post after the OP : everyone will say different things.

Also and correct me if I am blabbing but I would think recording at 96/24 on a Classic album or very easy listening would probably be different to 44.1/16 but I may be outta order here as this has never been an issue. 48/24 everyday all day here and we would have been asked otherwise from the management and label guysin theknow if that wasn't enough.

The songs gets diluted down to 44.1/16 anyways when released so having lots of big 96/24 sessions on the hard drive will eat those SSD's pretty quick.

[PMF Media]

Use your ears, listen carefully to the different rates, I record all my music at 44.1/24bit because I like the way it sounds, but that's just my personal preference everyone will be different.

[Bob Olhsson]

Didn't ADATs run at 48?

[nigelpry]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Didn't ADATs run at 48?

Yes.

You could actually alter the sample rate by using the Pitch Up/Down buttons, in effect a digital varispeed of sorts.

So you could get it to sample at 44.1k by turning the pitch down to a specific value (that I forget now), but then the realtime minute/second counter became inaccurate, as it only correctly showed elapsed time when Pitch was set at it's 0 position.

I never met anyone who chose to try to record at 44.1k after they realised this.

[capt kirk]

We have/use a Rupert Neve console with 1073 sidecar, with PT 12 and record 96/24 for music. I dont know if anyone can hear or care about any difference in these things anymore. I found the bass more realistic (to me) when it went to 24 bit, but 96khz is overkill AFAIC, but hey it works. if you wana really sound great run it back through a Focusrite Red compressor and a Studer 1/2 inch.....

[dankin]

24/48 for me. That's also what I see the most around Nashville.