I wasn't asking to debate the merits of 96k. That can be done elsewhere please.stringtapper wrote:A few questions:neuronaut wrote:Yes, I record everything at 96k.
1. What microphone are you using to record?
2. What is the upper limit of your microphone's frequency range?
3. What monitors are you using?
4. What is the upper limit of your monitors' frequency range?
Unless you're recording with something like a Sennheiser MKH800 and monitoring through something like Adam A7Xs (both with an upper limit of around 50kHz) then it's likely that you're not even capturing the full range that 96kHz offers, let alone "hearing" it (yes I know about research into how ultrasonic frequencies may be perceived non-aurally through things like bone conduction, but there's still more research to be done on the subject and the point is moot if your monitors don't even approach those high limits anyway).
I don't use any microphones.
I record analog synths and soft synths. Both are capable of producing wave forms that are higher resolution, and render details that are possibly more complex and precise than the past digital standards (which are horrific).