Toneport Users - anyone using 96KHz mode sucessfully ?
-
- KVRist
- 336 posts since 21 Aug, 2004 from UK
I have what I thought was a pretty high-end home users system (3.00 gigahertz Intel Pentium 4, 2Gig RAM) but setting Toneport to 96KHz makes playback with a total of 2 midi tracks and half a dozen VST(i)s impossible.
Before I delve in to my O/S and see if that helps, ahs anyone got Toneport in 96KHz mode to behave?
Before I delve in to my O/S and see if that helps, ahs anyone got Toneport in 96KHz mode to behave?
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
I haven't tried it yet. I don't even see where you set it at.... to be honest with you, I wouldn't bother. They offer it for 'compatibility' reasons because not all hosts adjust sample rate on the fly like Tracktion. It's "96 kHz compatible" not true 96 kHz. In other words, it's doubling the 48 kHz native rate with simple mathematics in order to transmit at that rate. Just stick with 48.
That said, ANY projects done at 96 will have a serious impact on your CPU consumption. Those extra cycles per second all have to be processed. If I'm not mistaken, Tracktion will also then convert it 32-bit (or 64-bit if you have this enabled) and ___?kHz, which is another calculation made.
Not worth the headache for zero sound quality improvement. 48kHz is still plenty! I stick with 44.1 and have done with it.
Greg
That said, ANY projects done at 96 will have a serious impact on your CPU consumption. Those extra cycles per second all have to be processed. If I'm not mistaken, Tracktion will also then convert it 32-bit (or 64-bit if you have this enabled) and ___?kHz, which is another calculation made.
Not worth the headache for zero sound quality improvement. 48kHz is still plenty! I stick with 44.1 and have done with it.
Greg
-
- KVRian
- 703 posts since 15 Aug, 2005
I'm just using 24/44.1 in both Tracktion and Digital Performer, and it's fine. I haven't bothered trying 96 because of what Greg mentioned about it being an artificial 96 anyway. The Toneport UX2 is mighty impressive to me - I didn't expect it to work as well as it does for good tone - even on vocals.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
I've yet to try it on vocals, but that's one of the main reasons I gave in and bought it.
Gotta give'er soon to see how she does....
For those who haven't noticed yet, I had a thread on Channel6, and basically, the entire TonePort can be automated with MIDI automation, and you can also tweak the amps or call up particular amps with MIDI messages.
For those of us with controllers, this undocumented (well, there IS a document... someone found the link! They just don't mention it in normal places) feature gives TP even more value-for-money "whiz-bang" happiness. I'm going to set up a controller memory slot so that I can be tweak-tastic without having to reach for the mouse all the time.
For those who haven't noticed yet, I had a thread on Channel6, and basically, the entire TonePort can be automated with MIDI automation, and you can also tweak the amps or call up particular amps with MIDI messages.
For those of us with controllers, this undocumented (well, there IS a document... someone found the link! They just don't mention it in normal places) feature gives TP even more value-for-money "whiz-bang" happiness. I'm going to set up a controller memory slot so that I can be tweak-tastic without having to reach for the mouse all the time.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 336 posts since 21 Aug, 2004 from UK
Nice one - thanksLunch Money wrote:
For those who haven't noticed yet, I had a thread on Channel6, and basically, the entire TonePort can be automated with MIDI automation, and you can also tweak the amps or call up particular amps with MIDI messages.

