What sample rate do you use on your HD24XR?

[Corran]

I saw the recent thread talking about the differences in a 192khz recording and 96khz, and realized a few months ago when I tried my XR at 88.2khz I got an outstanding recording. I don't know if it was just a good setup, and it was definitely some excellent players.

So, I thought a poll would be cool to see what people are using on their XR. I don't mean to exclude the regular HD24 users but I'm really interested in whether or not the higher sample rates are used (and which one).

Let's assume the target is a 44/16 CD.

[Corran]

Oh and if you have specific reasons why you choose a certain sample rate please do tell. I currently use 48 because it doesn't take up large amounts of HD space and I hear that Alesis' clock works best at 48 (don't know where I heard that).

[LX3]

48kHz... Because most of the work I do is for video, and I usually need the tracks. If I'm recording for CD, than 44.1.

These days I'm using the HD24s less and less. But I've had very little call for 96kHz so far. In most cases the client wants to mix, and giving them 96kHz audio can cause them problems. I did it once at the client's request (not on the HD24 - not enough tracks) and they ended up having to downsample all the multitracks to 48k anyway, because they ran out of DSP in Pro Tools when they started mixing.

The issue at 44.1kHz is that the clock isn't 100% accurate (runs slightly fast? Or is it slow?), which occasionally fools some users when they try to sync it with other freewheeled recordings at 44.1 (never a good idea anyway).

The 44.1 clock is good quality, it's just not quite the right speed.

[Corran]

Ah, good to know.

[joelpatterson]

I just have the regular non-XR, but I use 48 every time and always-- seems like it works okay... I've also heard that the clock is a little zooey at 44.1.

[t_chance]

For most projects past it's been 44/88, because I had no intention of any outboard digital processing and I was just mixing down the tracks myself. Now if any chance of video or outside production, it's 48/96. If clocking at 44.1 is an issue, use a better external clock.

[RobAnderson]

I can't say I only use one sample rate.

Generally I use 44.1 since most of what I do ends up on CD.

Sometimes I use 48 if the project might end up being sync'ed to video

I'll use 88 or 96 if it is specified by the client.

But I should qualify all of this by saying that I generally use outboard converters with my own machines.

[XLR2XLR]

I used 44.1 at first, saw people moaning here and went to 48k which suited a gig
which had a video element.

Orchestral recording just done, did main at 88.2 and 1 at 48kHz for BU.

I SRC'd to 44.1 anyway for CD purposes.

I have not had a chance to do an A B between 88.2 and 48k asyet, when time permits.

Would 88.2 not have a problem too, seen as it is a multiple of 44.1 and that is wonky.

What evidence supports wonk at 44.1 kHz?

Sure they are a bit old but I think they are awesome and plan to run mine for years to come.

A real joy to own IMO.

[Corran]

I'd be interested to hear your comparison.

I think I'm going to try a session I have tomorrow night at full 96khz to try it out. It's only a 30-minute recital so I won't be killing my HD.

[edbro]

I usually need more than 12 channels so I record at 48k. Next time I am using less than 12, I think I will try one of the higher rates to see if I hear a difference. I've also wondered if Mic & room quality would then become more of an issue at higher rates.

[LX3]

Originally Posted by XLR2XLR

What evidence supports wonk at 44.1 kHz?

I think Marc Brevoort of the HD24 YahooGroup put a frequency counter on the clock directly. (Oh my god, am I supporting the concept of measuring things? ). Also, if I remember correctly, there was confirmation from Alesis themselves.

The various sample clocks are derived from a much higher frequency master clock by dividing down, and it just so happens that that master clock frequency doesn't perfectly divide down to 44.1kHz. It comes very close... I did the maths once to try and work out how far it's off in cents.

Hey, and I just found it in my purple notebook of everything:

The clock ends up as 44118 Hz, making HD24 44.1kHz audio...

[1200 x (100 cents per semitone x 12 semitones) x ln (44118/44100)] / ln2

= 0.706 cents flat when played back at a true 44.1kHz.

People don't usually discover this until they try to lay lengthy tracks together that were recorded simultaneously on both an HD24 and something else... (e.g. recording room sound on a separate portable recorder) and then find they won't stay in sync. But it's potentially a losing battle trying to do that anyway, even if the clocks are "accurate". Common clock required from somewhere.

Or if you have $15,000 spare, clock each recorder with its own Isochrone 10M... theoretically accurate to about one sample every 8 days!

[Corran]

0.7 cents flat, cool to know! I am a stickler for tuning when I play in an ensemble but that I probably couldn't hear...

Is it right to assume that the 88.2khz setting will have a similar issue?

I'd love to know what MichaelPatrick thinks about recording at 96khz. Do you feel you get a better sound, and why?

[Groff]

Is this 44.1 clock issue refers to XR too?

[LX3]

Originally Posted by Groff

Is this 44.1 clock issue refers to XR too?

I believe so.