What sample rate you're running your DAW(s) on?

[DJ Warmonger]

Anything above 44100 is for dogs and bats.

It's not for your ears, it's for the signal processing.

It's just exactly the same concept as anti-aliasing in games. It doesn't change monitor resolution you see, but at the end the image looks somewhat smoother

[Bulbizarre]

Anything above 44100 is for dogs and bats.

Anything above 20 kHz of your sound is for dogs and bats!
Even the 2 kHz difference between 44.1 and 48 kHz do make a difference. Its the analog filters you need before your DAC for recording. On 44100 hz the filter needs to cut between 20 and 22.05 kHz by maybe 50dB, which creates all kinds of ripple in the audible area. On 48 kHz it needs to be only half as steep. On 96 kHz a simple filter would be sufficient already… (a 24 dB per octave filter would cut it already by 48 dB, as it may alias into the inaudible area between 20 kHz and nyquist. That gives you about 2 octaves range for the filter. Whereas the range between 20 and Nyquist at 48 kHz is a much smaller intervall…
I would always prefer to record on 96 kHz, the difference is pretty audible even on cheap audio interfaces. Later for processing and mixing it depends on your non-linear fx like saturation. If they have internal oversampling you are fine to run your session in 48 kHz like I do mostly.
Sample rate conversion is pretty good nowadays, and as Edgar said downsampling is better than the other way around…

Alright, I guess this is a major consideration for every acoustic musician, but I'm mostly ITB using plugins and softsynths.
According to what you say I would benefit from higher SR if I have my mastering done on analog gear right ? Is 48khz a good choice in the case ? I wonder how far goes the audible difference.

[Ploki]

Youtube cuts shit off at 16k so there’s that

[Tj Shredder]

Anything above 44100 is for dogs and bats.

Anything above 20 kHz of your sound is for dogs and bats!
Even the 2 kHz difference between 44.1 and 48 kHz do make a difference. Its the analog filters you need before your DAC for recording. On 44100 hz the filter needs to cut between 20 and 22.05 kHz by maybe 50dB, which creates all kinds of ripple in the audible area. On 48 kHz it needs to be only half as steep. On 96 kHz a simple filter would be sufficient already… (a 24 dB per octave filter would cut it already by 48 dB, as it may alias into the inaudible area between 20 kHz and nyquist. That gives you about 2 octaves range for the filter. Whereas the range between 20 and Nyquist at 48 kHz is a much smaller intervall…
I would always prefer to record on 96 kHz, the difference is pretty audible even on cheap audio interfaces. Later for processing and mixing it depends on your non-linear fx like saturation. If they have internal oversampling you are fine to run your session in 48 kHz like I do mostly.
Sample rate conversion is pretty good nowadays, and as Edgar said downsampling is better than the other way around…

Alright, I guess this is a major consideration for every acoustic musician, but I'm mostly ITB using plugins and softsynths.
According to what you say I would benefit from higher SR if I have my mastering done on analog gear right ? Is 48khz a good choice in the case ? I wonder how far goes the audible difference.

That depends on your plugins. If you use the older Cherry Audio synths you would need to oversample yourself (play in a higher sample rate), the last Mercury-4 though has oversampling built in and even without sounds decent. If you are young and capable of hearing above 16 kHz simply use your ears…
If you work with Bitwig and create all in the Grid, you can happily stay in 48 kHz, as it does 4 times oversampling anyway…
If you love the sound of digital synths and samplers of the 80s, you should stay low to get that gritty aliasing sound of those instruments…; - )
Some DAWs allow to render with a higher sample rate than you arranged your work. But be careful, always listen to the result, and avoid bouncing in the lower SR…
On the other hand, if you produce for the dance floor, your audience has probably already destroyed their ears…

[pdxindy]

lright, I guess this is a major consideration for every acoustic musician, but I'm mostly ITB using plugins and softsynths.
According to what you say I would benefit from higher SR if I have my mastering done on analog gear right ? Is 48khz a good choice in the case ? I wonder how far goes the audible difference.

For recording audio, I am totally fine with 48khz

I often have my projects at 96khz because some of my favorite software synths sound better. Bazille for example sounds noticeably better at 96 than 48. Some other synth may have no significant difference.

[ahmadfarihan]

48khz feels like not sinning but also not a prude.