KVR Audio

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:51 am

Shy wrote: No thanks, I already know about those.

No, you obviously don't.

Do you care to say why you think I should look them up?

Because in that case you may perhaps stumble over the rather easily detectable differences a given synths filter sweep makes when comparing the same sequence at 44.1 and 96kHz.

I really don't want to do any audio examples for an insulting person like you, but I will try my best tomorrow, though, just to make you shut the f**k up.

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:56 am

Because in that case you may perhaps stumble over the rather easily detectable differences a given synths filter sweep makes when comparing the same sequence at 44.1 and 96kHz.

Can you please rewrite that so that I'd understand what the heck you mean?
Edit: Oh, maybe you mean that some crap quality synth that actually has no form of aliasing control could benefit from it because more aliasing would be done in the unhearable frequency range.

You are the ones who seem to either obviously understand nothing, or like saying absolutely ridiculous nonsense.

I'll await your audio samples. I look forward to being shut the f**k up by your idiocy.

dusted william · Post by **dusted william** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:02 am

OMG,

just do the test yourself.

create a 1 bar loop with a synth.

Change the sample rate in your host to 96.

-> hear the difference.

It's that easy for you to do.

Problem is, you've now backed yourself into such a corner that I suspect you will never admit to hearing a change in quality. Hence you will continue to make an ass of yourself out of self pride.

you're so George Bush.

arghhhh

dw

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:04 am

No, Mr. William, you're being an ass because you don't dare to provide a simple single sample that demonstrates your ridiculous theory.

Marduchk · Post by **Marduchk** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:05 am

everyone is wrong except you Shy, we all know it...

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:08 am

Hi, I'm back! If I may interject into the fray...

Before I went into this last mixing session, I upsampled the previous 96k mixdown to 192khz with Audiomove, but didn't get a chance to listen to it. I just listened to it in Wavelab against this last mix, which I exported at 44/32, and damn, I have to say that the high end was definitely smoother on the 192khz mix!! The pro-upsample people are right!

So I re-opened Cubase and I'm exporting my mix again at 96k (I don't get 192khz as an option, even if EMU supports it?), and maybe I can post something...mind you, would there be any point in posting an mp3? I guess so, if the purpose is to wind up with a better 16-bit master?

Oh, and should I upsample the final mix to 192, or should I just stay at 96k? I mean, it's a quater of a Gig!!

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:09 am

Marduchk wrote:everyone is wrong except you Shy, we all know it...

Thanks for not anwering my question and proving that you're just trolling.

dusted william · Post by **dusted william** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:10 am

I will not upload a sample for you to listen to when it is so easy for you to do it yourself.

I give up! This only came up because of my experience w/ wizoo and increasing the sample rate.

dw

Marduchk · Post by **Marduchk** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:10 am

Shy wrote:
Marduchk wrote:everyone is wrong except you Shy, we all know it...
Thanks for not anwering my question and proving that you're just trolling.

I answered you already, do the research.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:14 am

dusted william wrote:I will not upload a sample for you to listen to when it is so easy for you to do it yourself.

I give up! This only came up because of my experience w/ wizoo and increasing the sample rate.

Don't give up - this is deadly interesting!

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:15 am

dusted william wrote:I will not upload a sample for you to listen to when it is so easy for you to do it yourself.

I give up! This only came up because of my experience w/ wizoo and increasing the sample rate.

dw

This is for you, bduffy.
Like I said, this guy will never upload a sample of his own, because his placebo nonsense is just that, placebo nonsense.

dusted william · Post by **dusted william** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:16 am

Oh, and should I upsample the final mix to 192, or should I just stay at 96k? I mean, it's a quarter of a Gig!! Shocked

I think you should before you add your mastering effects to it. Just to squeeze out that last bit of quality. For me I only take the time to do that if I'm working on my last finished version.

dw

dusted william · Post by **dusted william** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:18 am

shy is just trolling,

I can only think he is a re-incarnate of some other regular. Even if he's been around since '04

dw

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:19 am

dusted william wrote:
Oh, and should I upsample the final mix to 192, or should I just stay at 96k? I mean, it's a quarter of a Gig!! Shocked
I think you should before you add your mastering effects to it. Just to squeeze out that last bit of quality. For me I only take the time to do that if I'm working on my last finished version.

dw

Right - I'm very close to the final version here...I'll do it right now, just to see if I can still hear the difference; I had to add a guitar solo since the last version; interested to see how that works out.

You guys think the difference would be noticeable in an mp3? I'll post it, if so.

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:21 am

dusted william wrote:shy is just trolling,

I can only think he is a re-incarnate of some other regular. Even if he's been around since '04

dw

You, troll, are the one who is trolling, claiming a whole lot and offering not a single proof for your ridiculous claims.

Which reverb can rival/test Waves trueverb??