Advice: Should I increase multi-channel recording capability or increase quality?

[severity]

Hello Everybody!
I've lurked on this site from time to time but I decided to create a profile so I could get some advice from all of the experts here

Basically, I use an Alesis MultiMix Firewire 12 (MultiMix 12 FireWire) with an m-audio Audio Buddy to give me 6 mic pre's. I'd like to use an 8 Channel mic pre like this nady pra-8 (PRA-8 Eight Channel Microphone Preamp | Nady Systems, Inc.) in order to max out my available mic preamps. But then I wonder if i should wait and spend some cash on a nice setup like a couple of the 8 channel presonus rack mounts or something with better quality recording capabilities (24-bit, 96khz) after I'm done with school. The pra-8 is cheap and the opamps can be upgraded and the multimix still works really well but those presonus racks are really nice. I record a lot of live instruments including drums and guitar (bass is DI) and would like to be able to record it all at once or without having to swap microphones around.

Any thoughts?

I will setup a poll if that is easier

Thanks!

EDIT: i know there technically isn't a huge leap in quality when going from 48khz to 96khz as far as the human ear is concerned but higher is better, right?!

 

[gecko zzed]

Do you have the number of inputs you need? If you need more, then that's where I would recommend spending money.

You mentioned a time when you will be "done with school", which suggests that you are only a few years into the home recording adventure, and that there is a lot more to come.

Recording at 24/44 or 24/48 is going to deliver exceptional results if everything is working for you, i.e. you are recording in a well-treated acoustic space, you have accurate monitoring, and well-developed recording techniques. Greater quality gains are likely to be had by looking after those things than by going to 24/96. (In fact, there is a school of thought, of which I'm a member, that says going to 24/96 does not yield any appreciable benefits, i.e. high is not necessarily better.)

 

[Massive Master]

Higher definitely takes up more space...

Seriously -- If you can't make one of the greatest recordings ever made, honored by throngs of audiophiles and celebrated by the industry - at 44.1kHz - bumping up the sample rate isn't going to help.

Adding to GZ - There is yet *another* school of thought that many converters of the "extremely budget friendly" variety actually sound considerably worse at multiples of the target rate.

 

[severity]

Do you have the number of inputs you need? If you need more, then that's where I would recommend spending money.

You mentioned a time when you will be "done with school", which suggests that you are only a few years into the home recording adventure, and that there is a lot more to come.

Recording at 24/44 or 24/48 is going to deliver exceptional results if everything is working for you, i.e. you are recording in a well-treated acoustic space, you have accurate monitoring, and well-developed recording techniques. Greater quality gains are likely to be had by looking after those things than by going to 24/96. (In fact, there is a school of thought, of which I'm a member, that says going to 24/96 does not yield any appreciable benefits, i.e. high is not necessarily better.)

Thank you for the response! I've been doing my own recording for about 10 years now, I went back to school for computer science right after I turned 30, ha ha. I definitely don't have the number of inputs I need for what I want to do, I just didn't want to invest in something that would be replaced in less than a year or so. Ok, it sounds like my best bet would be to stick to my Multimix and use the nady to expand my available inputs. I think at this point in my recording journey my recording space is probably my biggest obstacle to making a great sounding track. Thanks for the advice!

 

[severity]

howdy, thought i should update, i ended up getting an sm pro audio pr8e and some new cables, was able to record 7 channels, 6 drum and 1 guitar and it worked pretty well, I used it later for some vocal recording and noticed quite a bit of noise, i've read the opamps can be replaced and i've done that kind of soldering before so at some point im gonna try and not screw up the new preamp i bought. Thanks again!

 

[Farview]

If you are looking at Nady preamps and that level of gear, any benefits of 96k (I'm also of the camp that there really aren't any benefits to 96k) would be lost due to the marginal quality of the equipment you are feeding the converters.

Don't get me wrong, you can make perfectly good recordings with that, but when you are trying to add quality to your system, sample rate should be the last thing in a long list of things to change.

After the quality of the instruments and the songs are sorted out, the microphone you choose makes the biggest difference in the recording quality. After you have a good collection of microphones to handle everything you normally come across, then upgrade your preamps to get the most out of those mics. After you've upgraded the preamps, then you can upgrade the converters.

Once all of the equipment you are using is top notch stuff, then you can change the sample rate and maybe hear a difference, if you strain really hard...