Quote Originally Posted by stjohn View Post
is there really a need for 96 khz? or is this for some sort of post-producton afterwards?

i was reading an article in SOS about sampling for films and the mad ****ers were using 192 khz samples, and one lad wanted to used double that but their computer couldnt take it.

but i find it hard to see the benefit, i mean why go to the bother if you are working in a 48000 environment, the conversion maths involved can be a bit messy.

is it for the old neve subconscious frequency components theory? or alisaing or something. im interested
There was a huge thread about this on k-v-r. Can't recall the details but basically 96 khz was advised for soft synths which apparently can sound a lot better and detailed than at lower rates. It does make sense if you think about it and, esp. with emulations of famous analog hardware, get you nearer to 'the real thing'. It also works with lots of effects and becomes increasingly important if you use lots of processing deviceson different tracks. Unfortunately cpus ain't quite there yet :)

Enter the nerd zone:

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewto...=sampling+rate