Sure thing. Both 44.1 kHz and 48 kHz give you the same 24‑bit dynamic range, so in theory the headroom is identical. The real difference is in the Nyquist limit: 22.05 kHz for 44.1 kHz and 24 kHz for 48 kHz. That extra 1.95 kHz isn’t something most listeners will notice, but it gives you a cleaner margin for anti‑alias filtering and makes the editing workflow a little smoother—fewer steps to get from raw to mix. In practice, a well‑filtered 44.1 kHz recording will sound just as pristine as a 48 kHz one on consumer gear. The only time you’ll hear the difference is if you’re pushing the edges of the audio spectrum or doing a lot of digital manipulation; then the extra headroom of 48 kHz can prevent clipping and distortion. Bottom line: 48 kHz is a marginal win for workflow and technical purity, but the audible difference is negligible on ordinary playback systems.

That’s the textbook answer, and honestly I don’t care for fluff. If you’re going to push bits around with EQ, compression, and parallel chains, the 48 kHz safety net feels like a polite courtesy. If you’re just laying down tracks that will sit on a CD or a streaming stream, the file‑size advantage of 44.1 kHz is the only real benefit. So, pick 48 kHz when you want a cleaner buffer, otherwise stick with the smaller, perfectly adequate 44.1 kHz.

Sounds like you’ve got it nailed. Just keep the workflow tight and the files tidy—those are the only real wins.