[speak_on]

Mixing process often involves hundreds of tracks, and if each introduces aliasing, this can become a problem. Some engineers do swear by "the final mix is 16/44.1 so why mix at a different resolution?" mantra - that's fine too.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

This is false. Aliasing is not additive in any meaningful way.

[speak_on]

Ok dude, you obviously never recorded anything. Twelve mics on a drum kit, 60 tracks of rhythm guitars, several bass guitar layers, vocals, backing vocals, electric organ, percussions, saxophone solo. Do you think recording them at 44.1 somehow creates a shared "cloud-based" aliasing artifact that I store in S3?

[PaulDavisThe1st]

> Ok dude, you obviously never recorded anything.

https://ardour.org/ is my website.

[speak_on]

Ha! OK I take that back.

Firstly, it's an amazing experience to randomly interact with people like you - I love and use your software. Hats off and thanks for what you offered to the industry!

But secondly, your statement makes even less sense to me: obviously artifacts do add up. Yes, not linearly, like any complex audio in general. But the more tracks with artifacts I have, the more artifacts I have overall. It's not like they cancel each other (outside of normal frequency cancellation).