My favorite sound for analog gear(digital sounds are great but I’m just talking about analog here) is analog gear->analog mixer->speakers. No digital conversion at all, the rytm sounds amazing this way, only in the moment though…
1 Like
I thought 192khz was the standard ? Why wouldnt you use the highest quality.
Back in my daw days my spec was;
windows 98
cubase 5
maudio 2496
all runining @ 24 bit 96 khz
(I probably only used maybe 8 stereo tracks)
Eats up your cpu😕
Soft synths like Monark stand out more in 96k.
a cool trick is record hardware at 41 or 48 k and then when you add the digital DAW/VST FX change to 96 khz or 192 khz and then render out. Improves the FX and EQ digital stuff and processing.
2 Likes
I thought with todays high powered cpus there shouldnt be any issues. Like I said, my old pentium 3 windows 98 was runing 24bit 96 khz.
You would think so, mines a 2012 and it still hits it pretty hard, I’ve managed to blow all my money on music gear so don’t know if the latest and greatest will do the job… Depends what your doing really, just recording should be fine but any cpu hungry plugins have a buffet with high sample rates…
It also has to do with some processes needing to run on one core, you might have 7 virtual cores free but the thing your doing starts maxing out the one it needs, you could still add more tasks to the other cores though…
So its maybe the more power you have the more things you want to do.
More power to you🍌
2 Likes
2 Likes
Right, it’s the OG gold standard, when there was such a thing as studio sound quality. The new standard ends up over compressed, shrunk to a shite mp3, and shoved into people’s phones to loose even more quality over bluetooth to some cheap speakers… 
1 Like
I wonder how many mastering engineers are mad that their hard work gets turned into mush on iTunes
2 Likes
The most perceivable difference I have heard at 96k over 44/48k is with certain software plugins. More open, more dynamics, less mud.
It is definitely not night and day though and requires good monitors to hear the details.
The obvious catch is much more CPU use.
This can be offset though slightly as you can raise the buffer setting due to the fact that when working at 96k the latency reduces, so raising the buffer slightly at 96k will bring you back to the same 44/48k latency you had previously, and therefor improve CPU usage.
2 Likes
so how much more storage space are we talking? i use 48K because it offers good latency/CPU performance on my system.
I think the file size is 1.5x more than a 48khz, but to have better mixing resolution and better sounding virtual instruments is already a plus.
1 Like
isn’t it 2x though?
1 Like
PCM File Size Calculations
Here are some file size calculations for common PCM audio settings. PCM stands for Pulse Code Modulation and commonly uses the file extensions .wav or .cda. There are quite a few other combinations of bits per sample and samples per second which may be used. We have included calculations for the most common mono (one channel) and stereo (two channel) settings.
Mono
Formula:
Bits per sample x samples per second = bits per second / 8 = Bytes per second x 60 seconds = Bytes per minute x 60 minutes = Bytes per hour of mono.
Settings Bitrate File size
per second File size
per minute File size
per hour
16 bit, 44.1 KHz 705.6 Kbps 88.2 KB 5.292 MB 317.52 MB
16 bit, 48 KHz 768 Kbps 96 KB 5.750 MB 345.60 MB
24 bit, 48KHz 1,152 Kbps 144 KB 8.640 MB 518.40 MB
24 bit, 96KHz 2,304 Kbps 288 KB 17.280 MB 1.0368 GB
Stereo
Formula:
Bits per sample x samples per second = bits per second x 2 channels = bits per second of stereo / 8 = Bytes per second of stereo x 60 seconds = Bytes per minute of stereo x 60 minutes = Bytes per hour of stereo.
Settings Bitrate File size
per second File size
per minute File size
per hour
16 bit, 44.1 KHz 1,411.2 Kbps 176.4 KB 10.584 MB 635.04 MB
16 bit, 48 KHz 1,536 Kbps 192 KB 11.520 MB 691.2 MB
24 bit, 48KHz 2,304 Kbps 288 KB 17.28 MB 1.036 GB
24 bit, 96KHz 4,608 Kbps 576 KB 34.56 MB 2.0736 GB
Taken from audiomountain.com
It is double.
4 Likes
Great post! Very helpful!! Thank you 
1 Like
Does anyone have any intel on the possible digital clocking issues when running @ 96kHz? I’d expect the clock has to be twice as tight as for 48kHz in order to perform similarly wrt jitter?
From Sweetwater
1 Like