Hey Steve, Produce at 96 kHz for a higher quality 48k output?

Hello Steve,

I am working on creating tracks for sync purposes (video, and streaming) and I am also would like to work on film composition in the near future (also working in Dolby Atmos)

My question is working at 96khz something done widely in the industry or should I just stick with working with 32 floating point and 48khz?

the title "Produce at 96 kHz for a higher quality 48 k output" came from the Dolby Atmos documentation here https://www.avid.com/plugins/dolby-atmos-production-suite

I have Pro Tools Ultimate running on an RME baby face pro. I have Adam a7x with Mogami cables in a decent enough treated space. I also own a pair of HD800s.

I'm not sure why you're asking me (you're the one with a treated space to do A-B tests), but since you are I say stick at 48k because doubling CPU consumption for something largely (if not completely) inaudible is probably not a worthwhile tradeoff.

doubling CPU consumption

in 96k the latency is divided by \2, so you can increase your asio buffer by *2, so i don't think it double cpu consumption.

Smaller latency means more CPU consumption (if anything).