24bit 96KHz vs 16bit 44KHz sessions

[chrisdee]

Hello. I'v been doing some simple test in Pro Tools LE 7.4cs8 and Mbox 2 Pro. I'v recording a electric guitar track (direct input on mbox 2 pro) and a vocal track (with my Shure KSM32 condenser mic). I'v added a DVerb on each track.

After recording in 24bit 96 KHz I bounced the session to a 24 bit 96KHz wav file and to a 16bit 44 KHz wav file.

Listening to the two different files many times I really can't hear that much difference in quality. The only minor difference may be that the DVerb sounds a little bit clearer in 24bit 96KHz, but it's so small difference that I'm not shure.

Recording in 24bit 96 KHz makes the sessions over twice as big, so if I can't hear a big difference I can't se the point over recording in 16bit 44KHz.

I wonder if anybody else here has done tests on recording 24bit 96 KHz vs 16bit 44KHz, and found any difference ?

[BradLyons]

What D/A converters are you using? What monitors are you using? How good is your room?

[chrisdee]

Genelec 8040a monitor speakers. I use the Mbox2 Pro xlr input's.
I'v also lisened through my AKG K271 and Beyerdynamic DT770 PRO headphones. I have a small room but it's sound isolated.

[thewiz]

Well the big difference is when mixing lots of tracks. Bit rate is more important than sample rate. Remember Bits has to do with headroom/dynamics. You will hear bigger difference with acoustic instruments. I do all my sessions in 24bit 44,1k sample rate.

[missionariojose]

Always use 24-bit, it's well worth it in the end. I'm usually happy with 44.1k, but I have done a few projects so far in 88.2k and there is some difference, specially over 2, 3k. Nothing you should sacrifice yourself for, but it's there.

[shoemakesmusic]

can't agree more. 24bit and 44.1k!

[daeron80]

There's probably not a significant difference in the tracked sound itself when using inexpensive converters. It is noticeable with good converters.

Some plug-ins will sound better at higher sample rates, especially EQs.

If you do much in the way of applying Audio Suite EQ, a high sample rate session will give you a much smoother sounding result, especially when boosting highs. That's because the rounding errors are spread out over a wider spectrum, half of which is beyond the range of human hearing, and you're able to store the result at full resolution.

However, if you're doing relatively large sessions, you're going to run out of mix power twice as fast at 88.2 than at 44.1. Not usually worth that, unless you're recording a small acoustic ensemble in an acoustically beautiful environment using great mics, pres, and converters for an audiophile market.

It's common these days to track and mix at 44.1 or 48, then bounce to 88.2 or 96 for mastering. I think plug-ins sound enough better at 48 that I always track and mix at that rate, master at 96, and don't go to 44.1 until just before dithering the CD master. But it's certainly possible to get good sound working at 44.1.

[EGS]

Me too 24/44.1

[BradLyons]

Originally Posted by chrisdee

Genelec 8040a monitor speakers. I use the Mbox2 Pro xlr input's.
I'v also lisened through my AKG K271 and Beyerdynamic DT770 PRO headphones. I have a small room but it's sound isolated.

Those are the ADC's, not the DAC's :) THe monitors you have are EXCELLENT, however the DAC is no-where near capable of producing that same kind of quality. If you were to monitor out through something like an Apogee MiniDAC for a Benchmark DAC1---you'll hear a lot more of these differences quite noticeably. In other words, the DAC on the Mbox2 is the limitation here.

[chrisdee]

Ok. Thanks for all the answers. I'll start to create 24bit 44 kHz sessions from now on.