is it pontless?

so heres my question is it pontless to trackout my beats at a higher bit depth and sample rate then the mp is givin out ... i know most mpc excluding the 4000 are at 16bit 44.1k. but i feel that tracking out the beats with higher settings its gunna get an overall more detailed sound of whats comming out of the mp .,, less degradation .. is this crazy? or does anybody else do this too ?

If you're strictly using the mp, you would only get 44/16 information in the recording, so going anything over that is a waste. Some people record say in 44/16 and master at a higher res. but you won't be adding anything useful or noticeable. I would just go with the native format.

yeah, both are fine

HOWEVER, your digital>analog converted signal won't be 'pure' when you recorded, itll probably be slightly distorted (mpc outputs, mixer perhaps, inputs of your AD conversion), and this CAN introduce higher frequency content, also noise. you might even like it

so id suggest you try both, although there probably won't be a very noticeble difference

If you add nothing to the track but what was done on the MPC then there really is no point to upscaling. In other words, if you create your track from beginning to end on the MPC and are only tracking into a DAW to mix further, add effects and master then you might as well keep it at 16 bit.

However, if you are adding other pieces (live instruments, live vocals etc...) in your DAW and mixed to the beat created on the MPC, then you can experience a net gain in quality by having your DAW session tracked at 24bit.

...hope that makes sense.

It is not pointless at all. you are recording in analog, so what the original source's sample & bit rate is not really relevant.
In my opinion, it is pointless to record in 16 bit, then you have option to record in 24 bit.
I always record in 24 bit, regardless of bitrate & depth of the samplers. You can always down convert later, so if you can record in 24 bit, just use it, it can't go wrong with it.

I read that recording at 24bit allows more headroom makin it easier to at the mixin stage. This is something I'm learning about so can't offer any real advice other than what I've read but like one of the previous posters said you can go from 24 down to 16 but not vice versa.

well i did give it a shot and yea i didnt notice a real big difference from 44.1 to 88.2... i kept it at 88.2 because i am going to rap over it and also have my boy come thru and lay some trombone on it .... to tell you the truth they both did not sound as good as what was coming straight outta the mp there was a certain overtone (hard to explain) but somthn on the sample that was missing .. still not any thing that would make or break a track but kind of a let down that it wasn't there even at 88.2 ... maby thats y pple spend good money on there a/d d/a converters .


~1~

88 is waaay past the human threshold of quality assessment.

16 bit 44100 into DAW from mpc for me. sound quality is never a topic among my critics.

48kHz and shit on the world.

i do 24 bit/44.1

**** 88

also, i only do 24 bit if im going to be tracking vocals into it later.

Track in 24/44.1. The reason why is because you are creating a new recording. Anytime you record anything its creating a new copy of it in your multitracker. Ever notice how when you record a sample into your mpc it doesn't sound exactly the same as it does off wax. Its the same concept in the computer world. However you will see benefits from mixing at higher bit rates. Specially when it comes to head room meaning you can mix louder without distortion and a lower noise floor meaning your recording will be cleaner as well. There are other benefits as well but those are the big ones in my opinion.