Thread do I should use digital recording

3 replies
4 participants
589 views
0 follower

strangersyl

New AFfiliate

First post

1 Posted on 04/04/2005 at 04:57:52

With my MIA Echo audio card, I have to use a sample rate between 30k and 50k when I'm using my spdif input for recording, I was wondering, am I better to use my analog input wich is a 1/4 jack with a sample rate of 96k or use my digital spdif input with a sample rate of 44k, what would result in a better recording ?

pax

AFfable Poster

2 Posted on 04/05/2005 at 03:31:01

i'm working 4 years now with the mia, cubase SX, both are set to 44,1.
in my experience the 44,1 rate is the best solution, there's no use going for higher rates due to dynamics in recording. Recording quality yet is very high. You can measure the dif. but not hear it.
Some will say also the mia is not pro, well i've heard a lot over the years,
The equipment has to meet certain qualitys but the man behind the desk mainly is responsable for the production.

regards chris

mackovyak

AFfable Poster

3 Posted on 04/06/2005 at 09:28:56

I'll second Chris' post,
Although people CLAIM :rolleyes: that they can hear how 96 and 48 are closer to analoge, the fact of the matter remains that you have to convert back to 44.1 for compact disc. Usually you have to use dither (noise) and in my opinion, the less conversions, the better. The more logs you have to run, the more chance of artifacts being introduced into your recording.

Justin

nihility0000

AFfable Poster

4 Posted on 05/29/2005 at 21:17:29

i would have to disagree. the more effects you put on a 44.1/16 recording the more of the quality you lose, in my experience. i have read up on the subject a little and changed to recording at 48 after years of recording at 44.1. i have noticed a very slight difference between the two. but i do agree that if not adding effects to the track (which is not too common) then 44.1 is the best for your cpu and quality. but thats just my opinion.

< Thread list
Rules

List of moderators