96k mastering with PT - how's that going?

[Jules]

So

Now HD has been going a while, how are you finding mastering sessions at 96k?

How to you SRC down to 44.1k 16bit?

Please tell us your methods and what works best for you!!

I am still on Mix + so dont have the benefit of ever having worked at 96k within PT.

Are you finding the plug ins work BETTER at 96k? - & produce BETTER sounding masters?

Please spill da beeenz!!

I'm all ears!!

BTW - I generate 96k masters (mixing on analog) by recording to a Masterlink... but I cant work with the files at that sample rate - I either

A) take them to pro mastering (where they CAN deal with 96k)

or

B) SRC them to 44.1 24 bit via my Finalizer - and master them in PT Mix + myself

(usually B due to low bugets)

I am keen to move up to HD, so want to know the story....

Thanks in advance....

[Will Russell]

Hi Jules!

I've been using an HD system at 96K since it came out. After a bunch of discussion and research I have decided to do my mastering at 44.1 instead of 96k. The reason is that any SRC (I use bounce to disk, tweakhead) has the potential to change not only the sound but also the peak level of an audio file, so I want to master after these potential changes have occured.

I think recording at 96k is awesome. No turning back for me.

[Chris Cavell]

I've gotten a few sessions at 96k to master. I use brick wall read ahead limiters leaving .4 dB of headroom just prior to SRC, ending with dithering. The amount to which SRC changes an individual peak is usually less than .2dB on my setup, so I've given myself the room I need. There are other reasons for leaving the .4dB overhead, but I won't get into that.

I've found that noise reduction plugins tend to work far more transparently at the higher sample rates (less audible artifacts).

As far as whether or not the 96k records I receive sound any better than the 44.1k....I find that is more engineer and overwhelmingly studio dependent. To be honest, I get more 96k records from amateurs than I do professionals working in professional settings, so in general, the 96k records often do not sound as good to me as the 44.1 records.

In my personal opinion Jules, the ability to work at higher sample rates should be the least of the deciding factors for a switch to HD. The converters used in the HD interfaces are a world apart from what was used in the 888's with the mix systems. On the whole, at any sample rate, an HD system will knock the pants off a mix setup.