Best sample rate to record at?

[Raoul23]

Right I just build my new HD3 rig and I've purchased a 192. What would be the best sample rate to record at. When I had le I just used to record at 44.1 and 24 bit. What would people recommend

Cheers

[Craig F]

The big guys I know are at 96

[albee1952]

For pop/rock/country/rap, 48K is plenty. For classical/acoustic/bluegrass, then maybe 96K makes sense. This is an old debate and you may see lots of argument over it, but it really boils down to a few things; is it a major artist?(96K may be demanded). Is it a demo for an unknown?(48k is plenty of drive space to burn up). Is it going to be a pro DVD release or will the final product be uploaded to iTunes(you get the idea). I operate a commercial studio in Nashville and have never needed to go above 48K, nor have I ever been asked to. I wonder how many hits in the late 80's into the 90's were done on 16 bit/44.1K ADAT machines? Its not the sample rate that creates a hit recording

[PTUser NYC]

I still don't think anyone has correctly identified in any meaningful way any difference between 44.1 kHz and higher rates in double blind tests with good converters.

Also, do most converters even increase the frequency of the Nyquist filter, or is it at 22kHz no matter what the rate?

[carlone]

The way the music business is today any recording you make of an artist (whether popular now or hopefully up and coming) is a potential final master. Drives are cheap. We always record lead vocals at 88.2 just in case.

Also, on the few tracks where we use live drums we record those at 88.2.

[JayNocturn]

Look at the sample rate of the end product. Then you are best to record at that sample rate or a higher multiple of that. The higher the better for audio quality, but of course one must stay with in their clients budget.

eg If the end product is CD (44.1k) then you should choose between 176.4k or 88.2k or 44.1k .

If the end product is DVD then you choose 192k or 96k. (and 48k for older video formats).

Doubling the sample rate will halve your latency times. Having higher sample rates may take up more processing power.

[Raoul23]

Cheers guys for all your input I'm gonna try 88.2 this week and see if I can notice a big difference

thanks again

[Third Eye Studios]

I use 44.1, to avoid SRC and save the drive space/resources.

[Raoul23]

Originally Posted by Third Eye Studios

I use 44.1, to avoid SRC and save the drive space/resources.

Sorry to be dumb what's SRC

[albee1952]

Originally Posted by Raoul23

Sorry to be dumb what's SRC

Sample Rate Conversion