Recording at 24 bits & 44.1khz or higher for better definition ?

[jppp26]

Hi
I'm using an M-Audio Profire 2626 interface and I'm wondering if I should upgrade to an Apogee Rosatta 200 to get better definition in my mixes or working at higher than 24bits/44.1Khz ?

I'm specially producing pop & dance music, so the only stuff I really need to record is real guitars and live vocals.
I really need more crystal quality when mixing a lot of tracks.

Thanks

[CrunkNationEnt]

What's up!

That upgrade may be unnecessary unless money is burning your pockets. In all of my research, I've found that 24-32/44.1k is the way to go...check out the links below and good luck!

What Sample Rate and Bit Depth To Record Songs At? | Studio Pros


16 vs. 24 bit Audio Recording Demystified


What does the bit depth and sample rate refer to?


http://www.applied-acoustics.com/tec...eratebitdepth/


24-bit vs 16-bit | Home Studio Corner

[zuzz]

Deadmau5 makes his music at 32bit/192khz. (i think)

[CrunkNationEnt]

Deadmau5 makes his music at 32bit/192khz. (i think)

Seems a little excessive, but of course...he is Deadmau5...he can afford to do that

[sleepy]

If you must use a higher sample rate, then do 88.2khz instead, because the math is easier and more accurate when converting to 44.1khz. Or, if you're working with multimedia and you need 48khz, then use a multiple of that, such as 96khz.

With that said, 44.1khz is fine. The question is not whether your audio device can do 192khz sample rate, the question is whether it can do a good job at that sample rate. Most converters can't do a great job at higher sample rates. So you get to a point where you lose more than you gain by going with a really high sample rate. I think 99.9% of projects can't benefit from going above 88.2khz because the extra detail is not needed, or the necessary gear to capture those nuances is not being used.

When tracking guitars, you'll benefit more by spending on your recording chain than by using a really high sample rate. Having good technique will really help also.

[CoMpLeXx]

TBH all depends on what you want your final product to be? if for CD then i would start at 16 Bit /44.1 to save the dithering process.

If for MP3 then the higher quality the audio to begin with the better the conversion to the codec, But MP3's themselves are only capable of playing 44.1 and 48 and 32Khz(99% of the time its 44.1). But personally i think 192KHZ is a waste, files are so huge and uses up so much of the processor it is pointless ATM. There was an argument at Gearslutz about this and most the guys agreed that 192Khz is a waste considering all it going to be played on is either iPod headphone or just loud inaccurate speakers like i night clubs.


As for paying the extra money for the Rosetta you are actually paying for the DAC conversion on the multiple channels, And to be honest getting an accurate DAC and Monitor setup will improve your mixing more than working at a higher sample rate

As for the higher Bits well TBH if your working for cd stay at 24 if your working for MP3 i would just stay at 24 as well. Bits are not really used in MP3 not like WAV's which bits hold the information for each samples loudness.

You might ask me now is 32 Bit louder than 24. The answer is yes it is louder but nearly everything uses 24 bit excluding DAW's so even if you produce at 32 Bit 99% of the time your music will probably end up being at 24 bit after engineers have finished with it.

So if you want you music to be 'Crystal' clear then i suggest better Monitors and DAC!

Oh and for the recording stuff decent pre amp and mic!

Hope that answers your question.

[moses]

TBH all depends on what you want your final product to be? if for CD then i would start at 16 Bit /44.1 to save the dithering process.

Your whole argumentation is wrong. We do not record audio to simply play it back. We process the material. And this is exactly the reason why a higher bit-depth and sample-rate perfectly makes sense.

With your advice, your recording would probably end up with a ~11-12bit result after processing.



I recommend you to stick with 24bit/44.1kHz as long you don't know better. Countless pros like to "oversample" and work at higher rates, but these techniques ask for a tight and well thought out work-flow.