Show of hands. How many of you are working at 96K?

Just wondering how many projects are coming in with this requirement in the brief. :question:

Zero so far. Last time I got confronted with it in post was a different engineer recording radio/podcast “soap” at 96kHz. I told him to cut it out. He did.

That was with PT though, so…

So, this has basically gone the way of Quad! :sweat_smile:

Yeah… I mean I think in post pretty much the only people that currently really care are sound designers. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some difference for mixing as well, but the trade off is taxing the system a great deal more so I’m not sure it’s a net-win. I’m thinking that those who maybe ‘should’ care the most are those on the bigger productions with more tracks, but with more tracks bumping it up to 96kHz might push the system to not work.

For music I suppose it may make more sense if plugins and processing benefits from it seeing that track count is lower.

But zero requests or requirements so far.

i already mixed a record in 96kHz
got the files already recorded from somebody else…

and from now and then somebody is asking about live recordings in 96kHz with my dLive and Dante
but mostly they do it in 48kHz

Was the sound NOTICEABLY BETTER AT at that rate?

no not really
but this depended on the poor recordings of some instruments

on the other hand
the Allen & Heath SQ series can connect to the old 48kHz stageboxes but sounds significant better with the new ones working with 96kHz

not 96k for me, but 88.2

I think the main benefit of higher sampling rates (at the cost of larger file sizes and higher CPU) are

  1. lower latency
  2. plugins & instruments (mostly) sound better

    I dont believe that audio sounds any different, i couldnt tell the difference at playback of a non processed audio file but its the processing of audio with plugins that does sound different.

e.g if i recorded 2 takes - a drumkit at 44.1 and then another take at 96k
if i did a rough level mix, with NO processing/plugins, i doubt i could tell the difference, but apply processing/plugins and its probably a lot more obvious the differences.

as a test take a project tracked/recorded at 44.1/48k add loads of plugins get the mix 99% there save a copy of it… upsample all the audio to 88.2/96k, convert the project and select No to keeping samples at position
hit play, immediately noticeable (apart from the higher cpu hit) is how richer everything sounds (specifically reverbs/saturation/compression plugins) and there is more of a sense of “space” in the mix.