2021..AD DA 44.1khz....192khz?

[CoolCat]

Analog to Digital.... cards in a preamp...standalone converter.... settings in the DAW project

Everything Im re-visiting says 24/44.1 still. ..but then a lot of the 192Khz units are out there and I wonder "does anyone really use 96k or 192khz?"

And is a ADC card for $400 in a preamp, like the ISA One, better than my interface AD?

time for a poll..

 

[keith.rogers]

From what I see in specs and actual tests, I don't think the AD thing is significant. Well, I'm certain it's not significant in any home recording I've done or anyone I recorded on my Zoom F8n in live settings. It's just FUD for studios to throw around. Not saying a specific piece of equipment or brand is not better for, say, pro use cases, but it's not something any normal human will ever hear.

I guess some folks are recording at 96kHz now. I'm firmly in the "only if you're recording bats" camp on that, but I have read some articles that suggest the engineering that goes into making the chips that are capable of these higher speeds, and the resulting changes in DAWs and plugins to account for it, may have benefits for recordings done at human range speeds of 48kHz (or 44.1kHz - but I probably would not record at 44.1, ever, as I don't have any expectation of burning audio CDs).

p.s. I record 24/48 - not in the poll.

 

[CoolCat]

How did I miss that? 24/48 .... I added it.
Your experience is same as mine so far. thanks for the input,

Im just dabbling around and converters popped up, wondering... if anyones really upgrading to 192k (or even 96k).
I have mine at 24/44.1 in Reaper, soundcard, and Project settings but I dont remember why.

 

[rob aylestone]

48K max for me - anything else I cannot hear so it's more processor overheads and more storage - plus lots of my huge sample library are 48, so what's the point?

 

[Farview]

I don't see much reason to go over 48k. Most of the reasons given for doing so are myth. There might be some small advantage to processing at higher sample rates, but probably not. Since most music is listened to as mp3, and mp3's have no information above 12k, recording sound 2-3 octaves above that seems a bit silly

The big difference between the sound of converters is caused by the clock and the analog path leading up to the converter. Clocks are pretty stable at this point, but the anaolg path does make a difference.

 

[Farview]

How did I miss that? 24/48 .... I added it.
Your experience is same as mine so far. thanks for the input,

Im just dabbling around and converters popped up, wondering... if anyones really upgrading to 192k (or even 96k).
I have mine at 24/44.1 in Reaper, soundcard, and Project settings but I dont remember why.

I did end up getting 96k converters, but only because I mix a lot of outside stuff. Other people were sending me files at high sample rates, so I needed to accommodate that instead of downsampling everything.

 

[RRuskin]

I used to record @ 48kHz/24bit and then mix through my console to another device @ 44.1/24bit in order to not need sample rate conversion when it came time to burn CDR's. Since adding and synching a 2nd RADAR 24 to my system, I'm doing everything @ 44.1/24bit.

 

[TalismanRich]

Dang... I couldn't vote.

I've pretty much settled on 24/88K at home. Similar latency to 96K, a bit less system strain and a multiple of 44.1 for easy conversion. My remote stuff has been 44.1K at either 16 or 24 bit.