Gearslutz.com - View Single Post - Better question...who's actually using 96kHz?
View Single Post
Old 28th December 2003   #4
doug_hti
Lives for gear
 
doug_hti's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Location: Calabasas, California
Posts: 1,142

I'm doing it? I'm mixing/summing in the box with it but most tracks or subgroups are getting some outboard love.

I don't find the extra hard drive space to be a problem, as I can still typically backup to one or two DVDs, where it used to have to be to CDs. 2nd backup, hard drives, they are cheap.

Sonically, the top end isn't as zingy. It doesn't turn metalic or "aggressive" nearly as fast IMO. Things seem a bit smoother.

With mutiple ADDAs, it seems to react better several generations in.

I'm doing it at 96k cause I'm doing quite a bit of preproduction in which the final project will be at 96k, so we don't have to retrack everything. Mixdown would be on large format console.

using lots of outboard, I would go 96k. If I wasn't and was mixing in the box, and know the project won't turn to 96k...then I think hearing it at 44.1 can give me a better idea of what it will be like without the final SRC. I really do EQ slightly different at the different sample rates.

Whether it sounds better?
I don't know...I end up with pleasing results at either rate.

Anyway, my 2cents.
__________________
doug
doug_hti is offline  
Reply With Quote