32-bit float is great when you're unsure of the dynamic range such as field recording. It effectively eliminates digital clipping.

Don't record in 32-bit (integer OR floating point), but process in 32-bit floating point, it allows you to go above 1.0 or below -1.0 (where it would normally clip) during editing and processing.

Additionally to the benefit of not having to care about clipping while working, in the production, mixing and mastering stages we use plugins that process the audio in various ways. Since every process performed on the audio, be it an EQ, compressor, reverb, saturation or almost anything else is degrading the sound quality by definition, and a typical project can have more than 10 plugins on some channels and then more on the various buses and the master bus, it is better to have the audio stored in 32 bits. Newer DAW's even offer the option to work in 64 bits and as we all know 64bit ADC's and DAC's don't exist (for audio applications anyway) . When the final project is rendered 16 or 24 bits can be used.

Beyond 24-bit 192Khz I don't notice 99% of the difference. Other than it 'sounds better somehow' (maybe sounds less compressed/condensed/limited?). But I do hear it.

One of the best channels around here!

from what I understand, the question of choosing the 48 KHz and other values has to do with the synchronization with the video files

holly shit, this video has some of the cleanest audio i ever listen on youtube, minus some popping here and there, the mic is amazing, really good explanation

48kHz (or multiple) was/is used because it is easier to synchronize with video.

The 2 boundaries in audio are the signals noise floor and clipping, each on the opposite end of the scale, from which you want to keep clear of. If the noise floor is around 90dB, all the extra dynamic rang will give you is more detailed noise floor. The last couple of most significant bits are often unused to prevent clipping. You want to make sure the recording gain is set so that you just prevent clipping, and have the strongest signal vs noise floor. Least significant bits of 24 bits represents nanovolts, 32 bits in the picovolts and smaller. A single resistor produces way more noise due to thermal effects.

88.2kHz vs 96kHz explained, thank you!

There is no 32-bit PCM. 24-bit already goes beyond the noise floor possible with electronics. "32-bit" in audio just means that the 24-bit PCM is represented in 32-bit floating point format (CPU friendly) - it is still just 24-bit resolution.

Thanks 🥰

As usual, another interesting topic and discussion by people that are way more experienced and smarter than I. I am neither a recording engineer nor artist. I just enjoy listening to good music, both digital and analog; digital for convenience (streaming music stations) and analog (LPs) for a more emotional and enjoyable experience. That is just my personal experience and ears, please do not start the analog vs. digital debate. Any way, I have a Rega phono stage with a analog to digital converter and usb digital output that I have been using to digitize my LPs. I like having my favorite LPs on my DAP. The sound quality of those rips is pretty good. The ADC is limited to 16 bit 48khz. Does anyone think that moving up to a converter with 24 bits and 96khz might yield a better sound quality?? I have a decent Cayin N3 Pro DAP and some nice JVC IEMs. Thanks for any input.

A vintage 2 bit system that sounds great is a bargain!

OK response for a listener's perspective. However, for working in a DAW, 32 (or even 64) is vastly preferred for various reasons.

If I understand this correctly, the 44.1 kHz sampling rate came to be a standard because this was what the readily available Sony PCM-1600 U-matic digital recorder used. This worked reasonably well back in the day. Specialized digital audio recorders (usually with diverse, proprietary encoding techniques) were rare on the ground, not to mention being really expensive. When the powers that be made things official with the Red Book for CDs, this became the standard.

Thank you old man 👍👍🏻👍🏼👍🏽👍🏾👍🏿

'A distant story remembered by someone, but not me! ' haha quality!

Nice explanation

I don’t disagree with recording at that resolution today, but I always wonder what film and music would be like today, had producers had technology or resolution from the future. I think of classic film or music from the 20s and 30’s had use of cameras and mics and studios from a decade or two in their future. This is an opportunity to record at a level that could be utilized a decade from now.