Im not certain if this is still active, if so can anyone confirm, while Im uncertain in my understanding up-sampling,  I had read somewhere, and/or assumed, recording at 96 kHz, or more would resolve any issues or need for up-sampling?   

JohnEgan
Im not certain if this is still active, if so can anyone confirm, while Im uncertain in my understanding up-sampling,  I had read somewhere, and/or assumed, recording at 96 kHz, or more would resolve any issues or need for up-sampling?   

As with so many aspects of pro audio, the final, definitive, 100% correct answer is...it depends. Check out the linked video.

Anderton
 
As with so many aspects of pro audio, the final, definitive, 100% correct answer is...it depends. Check out the linked video.

Maybe I should have asked, I record at 96k, is there a still a need for up-sampling? (Sorry Im not sure which video was intended to watch?) 

Ok sorry I see video, a lot math going on there, LOL, so not as simple an answer as "yes" just record at 96k
 

Recording at 96 kHz will solve most issues that upsampling is intended to solve. However as the video shows, there's a significant audible difference between recording at 88.1 kHz and 176.2 kHz with a very specific type of waveform that's generated in the box. Then again, how often will you use a sound source that is affected in this way (answer: not often!), and how many people would even know that it was supposed to sound different (I doubt any).
 
Just to bring things back on course, all that matters is the emotional impact of the music on the listener. A great song is a great song at 44.1 or 96 or 384 kHz, and while a particular virtual synth might sound slightly different at these different sample rates, I don't think it would interfere with anyone's listening pleasure. 
 
That said, though...you pretty much can't go wrong with higher sample rates, if your system is up to the task. If not, well, there's always upsampling.

Anderton
That said, though...you pretty much can't go wrong with higher sample rates, if your system is up to the task. If not, well, there's always upsampling.

Great thanks, I appreciate having one less thing to wonder about, I guess that would resolve those worries for the OP also assuming their computer system is somewhat current. Would it be correct to assume at 96k, it would be of no real benefit (or risk) to have the global 2x enabled?
 

JohnEgan
 Would it be correct to assume at 96k, it would be of no real benefit (or risk) to have the global 2x enabled?

 
Upsampling should be applied selectively because it's not always needed and does use resources. Simply enable it on playback if you have doubts. If you hear an improvement, leave it enabled. If not, don't.
 
FWIW "improvement" is subjective. Foldover distortion can give a thicker sound that some people prefer compared to an extremely clean sound.
 

Anderton
 "improvement" is subjective. Foldover distortion can give a thicker sound that some people prefer compared to an extremely clean sound.

Like a song Im doing after going through the effort to sound prestine, Im going through the effort to make it sound like its played on a scratched dusty warped record from the 50's, LOL
Cheers