• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

How do you record your sets?

SubMissioN

TRIBE Member
But if you record that wave in 96k before you dither it and bounce it down to mp3 which is done when your mastering. You do get a better quality Mp3 thats common recording practice.
 

SubMissioN

TRIBE Member
Your embarrassing yourself. So i have nothing more to say. I was trying to help you understand how to get a better sounding set together that you could play live and record to get a great quality cd and Mp3s. That could then be compressed however you want for whatever it is your doing on the internet. But your more interested in being cool and dissin people so go fuck yourself.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
I am familiar with the principle of recording sets @ 96khz, even if you're compressing down to 44 later on the gist is that the exta dynamic range of the 96khz recording will still influence how the track sounds at 44. You might have to be a super audiophile nerd to tell the difference - I haven't experimented.

Question though: my soundcard is an audiophile 192... but looking a the specs of my Xone 32 - its frequency response is 10hz to 30khz, am I right in assuming there would be minimal benefit to recording at 96khz? The extra hard drive usage might cancel that out...

Come to think of it - if 30khz is my max in my mixer, am I just wasting space recording at 44 even?

Or am I committing an error: is there a difference between the 96khz digital recording of my soundcard and the frequency range of my mixer? Meaning: since the signal out of my mixer is analog maybe its still good to record at 96khz?

A little confused...
 

SubMissioN

TRIBE Member
I am familiar with the principle of recording sets @ 96khz, even if you're compressing down to 44 later on the gist is that the exta dynamic range of the 96khz recording will still influence how the track sounds at 44. You might have to be a super audiophile nerd to tell the difference - I haven't experimented.

Question though: my soundcard is an audiophile 192... but looking a the specs of my Xone 32 - its frequency response is 10hz to 30khz, am I right in assuming there would be minimal benefit to recording at 96khz? The extra hard drive usage might cancel that out...

Come to think of it - if 30khz is my max in my mixer, am I just wasting space recording at 44 even?

Or am I committing an error: is there a difference between the 96khz digital recording of my soundcard and the frequency range of my mixer? Meaning: since the signal out of my mixer is analog maybe its still good to record at 96khz?

A little confused...
Sure it always good to record at 96k no matter what your recording from or out of. You still get a better dynamic range from the original recording which makes for better referencing during your mastering process. Now you choose to store it after is up to you. Because the output range on your mixer you would be fine at playing your mastered track at 44.1k after you've recorded it at 96k and dithered it and bounce it down to 44.1k you would get the best sounding 44.1k track you could get. The fact that it is Analogue does affect the sound giving it a warmer feel which would sound great recorded at 96k especially if your recording your set or a mix. It will give a better mastered cd to sell. I find it strange that Allen and Heath would make a board with that kind of frequency output. Its odd.
 

SubMissioN

TRIBE Member
Sure it always good to record at 96k no matter what your recording from or out of. You still get a better dynamic range from the original recording which makes for better referencing during your mastering process. Now you choose to store it after is up to you. Because the output range on your mixer you would be fine at playing your mastered track at 44.1k after you've recorded it at 96k and dithered it and bounce it down to 44.1k you would get the best sounding 44.1k track you could get. The fact that it is Analogue does affect the sound giving it a warmer feel which would sound great recorded at 96k especially if your recording your set or a mix. It will give a better mastered cd to sell. I find it strange that Allen and Heath would make a board with that kind of frequency output. Its odd.
The above only applys if your recording a song or a set for the first time or to make a demo cd. If you bought the song and its on a cd then the 96k recording has already been done and mastered to a 44.1k track. So recording it back up to 96k won't do much for you because it has already been compressed to 44.1k the original dynamics from the stem files are compressed. Whatever you decide to do just make sure the sample rate of all your songs are the same or else your gonna have a hell of a time beat matching them.
 
Top