Topic: Any benefit to using higher sample rates? (Fireface UFX/ADI-8 DS mk3)
Hi,
I am wondering if there are any actual benefits to using sample rates above 44.1 kHz, both in recording as well as processing in a DAW.
From what I understand, it is technically easier to oversample and use a less steep anti-aliasing filter plus some digital filtering to get a better 44.1 kHz band-limited signal. The anti-aliasing filter at a 44.1 kHz sample rate would have to be very steep so that it wouldn't attenuate the signal within the threshold of human hearing.
This, however, seems to me to be something that the actual A/D converters would do?
Oversampling aside, are there any benefits to using sample rates beyond 44.1 kHz?
I guess that the AD/DA latency would be slightly lower at higher sample rates, but on the other hand I guess that I might be able to use smaller (relative) buffer sizes at lower sample rates because it's less taxing on my PC - keeping in mind that a 256 sample buffer at 96 kHz should result in the same latency as a 128 sample buffer at 48 kHz.
All I can see are downsides: high sample rates require much more bandwidth, storage space and processing power.
I'll resample everything down to 44.1 kHz anyway when exporting audio.
So what I would like to know:
Do the AD converters in the Fireface UFX and ADI-8 DS mkIII oversample?
What reasons would there be to record in higher sample rates, especially 96 kHz or above?
What reasons would there be to process, mix and master in higher sample rates?
I'm currently leaning towards working in 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz. Not only do I expect to need a fraction of the processing power and storage space, I could also expand my Fireface UFX further, because the ADI-8 DS mkIII should only need a single ADAT port in 44.1/48 kHz instead of two (because DS at 96 kHz).