44,1 kHz 16 bit or 24 bit or 48 khz or 96 kHz and again 16 bit vs. 24 bit...

Try to post this on gearslutz, you'll be more likely to get an answer.
In case you don't know what it is, it's a forum dedicated to recording, mixing and mastering.

That said, I think the safest choice would be to record in 24/96 and convert to 16/44, but you should get another opinion.

Anytime you downconvert from a higher-resolution to a lower-resolution format, loss of quality will occur.  In short, if your playback system for whatever your recorded content is going to be a standard Red Book (44.1Khz/16-bit sampling rate) CD-player/DAC, you may as well record in this format.

If you do have a playback system that supports oversampled recordings such as those made at 96kHz/24-bit sampled rate, such as a DVD-audio or SACD-player, or a DAP featuring a DAC capable of natively supporting this resolution, then you should record in that mode.

There are audiophile-grade professional recorders from Korg, for example, that support 1-bit DSD recording formats, which is sampled at over 2 MHz and is used by SACD media.  This format avoids the PCM filtering process and is considered generally superior to the Red Book format.

For one thing, you can record at 24/96 and save that file, even to a CD.

Native CD files (using a universal CD format) by the record companies are 16/44.  A CD player will only play the 16/44, although some will play MP3 files directly, these are even less that 16/44.

To play your files in your car, you will need to do a standard CD style file onto the CD.

If you are going to put the files into your computer and play them back with a DAC capable of 24/96, at all, I would use the 24/96 format.  I don't think you are planning to create CDs for distribution, although you could down convert to these files.

A question to possible readers, are there CD players capable of playing lossless files in the higher level 24/96? AFAIK you need SACD or DVDa to play this type of music resolution.

In my opinion no. Just try to use a high quality dithering program if you can.

I would record everything at 24bit, no question. Picking the sampling rate is trickier. Going 44.1 is probably your best move. It will sound great, not need sample rate conversion, and save disk/hard drive space. Personally I would record at as high of a resolution as possible, then down convert everything.

One other note-make sure you have wind protection for your mic's. Even a light wind can really screw up a good recording.

These is not such thing as 24 bit resolution playback,   it doesn't exist,  no DAC or amp has a 6x24=144db SNR.

The only real advantage to playing recordings made at 24/96 with a "24/96" DAC is that the recording wasn't dithered down,   depending on the quality of the dithering software the difference can be audible. 

If you are going to be processing or mixing the recording in any way then you are better off recording in higher quality so you have headroom.  If you are not, then just recording to same depth/sample rate you'll be distributing it in is fine.  If you are going to to process/mix it and then only put it on a normal redbook CD then I would use 24/88.2  The extra bit depth and sample rate will help as I described above, but the sample rate of 88.2 (being a multiple of 44.1) will downsample to 44.1 more cleanly than 96 will.  The difference isn't likely to be large with a decent sampler, so if you are planing to release your recordings in different formats (normal CDs, plus FLAC downloads or something) then I'd use 24/96 and downsample to the maximum allowed by the individual format.

I agree fully,  wish more LP transfers would just record at 16/44.1,  but it does take a more experienced materer as you have less headroom for error,  but it eliminates the dither effect on SQ.  But there are some gooth dithering algorithms available to the masses now that make this less of an issue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverickronin 

If you are going to be processing or mixing the recording in any way then you are better off recording in higher quality so you have headroom.  If you are not, then just recording to same depth/sample rate you'll be distributing it in is fine.  If you are going to to process/mix it and then only put it on a normal redbook CD then I would use 24/88.2  The extra bit depth and sample rate will help as I described above, but the sample rate of 88.2 (being a multiple of 44.1) will downsample to 44.1 more cleanly than 96 will.  The difference isn't likely to be large with a decent sampler, so if you are planing to release your recordings in different formats (normal CDs, plus FLAC downloads or something) then I'd use 24/96 and downsample to the maximum allowed by the individual format.