24/88.2 vs 24/44.1 Essay
Absolutely, in the home 16/44.1 is fine. I always wonder about what kind of limiting is going on for the master.
The classical engineers that you know start to run out of tracks or CPU headroom if they're recording 24-32-48 tracks at once of 24/192 or 24/176.4 khz audio.
I can assure you that in the setup tests for recording the Fazioli F278, the pair of Neumann TLM-49's sounded their best at 88.2khz. Those big concert grands throw up a ton of high frequency harmonics way above 20khz. I don't know if the Apogee Duet switches that brickwall 20-20khz filter to have a gentler slope, etc., but that setup just sounds amazing. It was for an archival recording and I can still get a beautiful "2:1 reconstruction" at 16/44.1 for CD Masters if I dither correctly for the end-user. The only reason I didn't record at 176.4khz because I read that the chance for A/D/D/A errors were greater at the quad-sample rate.
That being said, I still track bands at 24/44.1 into Pro Tools 9 (I can do a max. of 16 i/o into an old 003R at once) but I do overdubs with the Apogee. Again, it's all in the end-user. For AAC delivery, I highly recommend the Mastered for iTunes droplet. Even though it's only 256kbps, the sample rate conversion from 88.2 to 44.1 khz is stunning.
But when I'm recording rap. I know full well that the 808 or 707 drum machine sounds used in production is playing back sample rates well below 16/44.1 so I'm recording "empty space" when tracking in 24/44.1 And it's overkill to place a $2000 LDC mic in front of "shouted word" content. An SM57 or at the most a Beta 58 is more than enough. -Especially when you throw multiband compression and a L1 or L2 limiter on the master buss, crushing the dynamic range down to 9dB.
My "classical piano" recordings have no eq and no compression because the performer, the piano, and the LDC mics do the work, so I have a huge dynamic range, no frequency masking, and it sounds so great, you might as well be there.
Absolutely, in the home 16/44.1 is fine. I always wonder about what kind of limiting is going on for the master.
The classical engineers that you know start to run out of tracks or CPU headroom if they're recording 24-32-48 tracks at once of 24/192 or 24/176.4 khz audio.
I can assure you that in the setup tests for recording the Fazioli F278, the pair of Neumann TLM-49's sounded their best at 88.2khz. Those big concert grands throw up a ton of high frequency harmonics way above 20khz. I don't know if the Apogee Duet switches that brickwall 20-20khz filter to have a gentler slope, etc., but that setup just sounds amazing. It was for an archival recording and I can still get a beautiful "2:1 reconstruction" at 16/44.1 for CD Masters if I dither correctly for the end-user. The only reason I didn't record at 176.4khz because I read that the chance for A/D/D/A errors were greater at the quad-sample rate.
That being said, I still track bands at 24/44.1 into Pro Tools 9 (I can do a max. of 16 i/o into an old 003R at once) but I do overdubs with the Apogee. Again, it's all in the end-user. For AAC delivery, I highly recommend the Mastered for iTunes droplet. Even though it's only 256kbps, the sample rate conversion from 88.2 to 44.1 khz is stunning.
But when I'm recording rap. I know full well that the 808 or 707 drum machine sounds used in production is playing back sample rates well below 16/44.1 so I'm recording "empty space" when tracking in 24/44.1 And it's overkill to place a $2000 LDC mic in front of "shouted word" content. An SM57 or at the most a Beta 58 is more than enough. -Especially when you throw multiband compression and a L1 or L2 limiter on the master buss, crushing the dynamic range down to 9dB.
My "classical piano" recordings have no eq and no compression because the performer, the piano, and the LDC mics do the work, so I have a huge dynamic range, no frequency masking, and it sounds so great, you might as well be there.