I posted this, because I think he had some interesting points. The first was that 44.1 is a CD standard, and that Video Standard is 48. So at minimum, we should be recording at 48kHz.
Secondly, he noted that the difference between 48, and 96, is measurable, so therefore it is discernible. And he said that at the moment with bandwidth what it is, it may be overkill, but, really it is about capturing the information for the future, and that by recording at 44.1, you are locked in.
He did note that the downfall is CPU resources.
Kind of peaked my interest, Here is an interesting quote from the Presonus website:
"As noted earlier, in the digital conversion process, the converters record and play samples at specified sample rates. The Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem states that in order to accurately reconstruct a signal of a specified bandwidth (that is, a definable frequency range, such as 20 Hz to 20 kHz), the sampling frequency must be greater than twice the highest frequency of the signal being sampled. If lower sampling rates are used, the original signal’s information may not be completely recoverable from the sampled signal"
And Further:
"In addition, higher sampling rates enable you to record very high frequencies above the normal range of human hearing. While inaudible by themselves, these ultrasonic frequencies can interact, creating intermodulation distortion (such as beating) that results in audible frequency content that many engineers believe to impart subtle psychoacoustic effects."
I doubt I'll jump to 96, but I may get into the habit of using 48kH.
I just thought it would make for interesting discussion. Food for thought.