Another sample rate question

[Einstein]

Okay, here goes...I have noticed that if I'm working in 48k, that if I mix down to 96 before processing any type of compression or limiting to the final mix, that it's much cleaner and gives me more headroom. I know that this is not due to the audio file sounding any better since it was recorded in 48, but that the plugs will process smoother with higher sample rates.

My actual question is this, if a whole project is recorded in 48k, is it benifitial to upsample the entire thing to say 96 or higher if the mix is going to be plug-in intensive?

Again, I understand that the file itself would have to be recorded at the higher sample rate to benifit on the original audio itself, but I'm talking about processing here. What are the technical theories behind this if any?

[lawrence_o]

The difference you're hearing is probably a bit more crispy top-end right? It's due to the filters in the ADDA it's like that. Normally, when going from 48k to 96, you can't add newer frequencies since there is nothing present above 24khz so the difference is purely your ADDA that filters differently.

I'd say, who cares?

Regards

[Einstein]

Oh, no, that's not what I mean........at least I don't think thats it.

Say you want to add some heavy limiting on the 2bus going out on the final mix. I've found that if I mixdown to 96, open the new stereo file, add my limiting, then go to CD, the results are soooo much cleaner. So I was wondering if this would be benificial. The results I'm judging by are once it's on CD, which means it's gone back down to 44.1.

[Paul David]

What are you mixing down to? I'm just trying to get a picture of your digital signal chain. Also, please list the actual software that you are using and any other variables that you think might be important i.e. which limiter.

[Einstein]

I'm using Nuendo, mixing in the box, and it seems to make a difference on just about anything I've tried. The L2 or L3 or the TL which is my favorite right now. It seems to make a pretty nocitable difference on compression as well. Seems like I actually read it in a magazing the first time I tried it. Some big name dude suggested it, but for the life of me, i can't remember who it was.

[lawrence_o]

I'd say, if it sounds better to you then just do it bro ;-) Who cares what the reason is :-)

Regards
Lawrence

[John The Cut]

Do you mean, when selecting an internal Mixdown you mix to 96k? or are you running the mix live and recording it at 96k (impossible that )?

It sounds an interesting experiment to try..

[oneartist]

Is there a reason you are not recording originally at 96K? I've noticed my best mics show their stuff at 96K whereas, at 44.1 it is harder to tell a difference.

Chuck

[Einstein]

If we record at 96k, the Apogees cut our inputs in half. We're looking to upgrade this eventually. I hope it's soon.

[Einstein]

And I meant internal mixdown.