View Single Post
Old 03-29-2026, 10:22 AM   #64
jbjb
Somewhat clueless
jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 798
Karma: 11569273
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratinox View Post
Not really "much" that I'm aware of: 24 bits at 48KHz. Provides plenty of room to accommodate any mistakes or errors in the original recordings. Unless a customer insists on something absurd like 32-bit/96KHz or higher -- because "jargon hi-res audio jargon jargon." But maybe that's more rant than discussion.
You're right in that most mixing seems to be at 48kHz. From what I've seen, though, the input (recording) stage would often sample at a higher rate (with a correspondingly easier analog anti-aliasing filter with a gentle roll-off, and then a non-causal digital decimation filter with a sharper roll-off would produce the final 48kHz "recorded" signal.

32-bit/96kHz is clearly pointless for the final product, but if you're doing a lot of manipulation and processing to produce that, doing that processing at higher resolution stops rounding errors from accumulating.
jbjb is offline   Reply With Quote