KVR Audio

kylen · Post by **kylen** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:12 pm

I'm working at 32bit float native files - not time to dither yet till I do word reduction. We're talking about sample rates here...

frequency_algorithm · Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:15 pm

kylen · Post by **kylen** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:16 pm

frequency_algorithm · Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:16 pm

is it safe to say that touching your mix isn't worth it unless it makes a significant difference sound or in rocking out a crowd?

mauseoleum · Post by **mauseoleum** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:22 pm

Perfectly safe. Rocking crowd probably won't hear the difference.

On headphones, otoh, it's quite obvious. Up to you ...

Dayl · Post by **Dayl** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:25 pm

frequency_algorithm wrote:is it safe to say that touching your mix isn't worth it unless it makes a significant difference sound or in rocking out a crowd?

Yeah, I would say that's safe to say, and I agree.

Its always worth trying new techniques in order to improve your mix in whatever way possible.

I believe that there is definite benefits to this practise. The more time I get to experiment with these things the better and I'll post the results after the trial and error process when I get the chance.

I wouldn't say this practise is a waste of time at all.

Each to their own. This thread is geared towards the people interested in trying out such practises, not to debate such things.

kylen · Post by **kylen** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:30 pm

frequency_algorithm wrote:is it safe to say that touching your mix isn't worth it unless it makes a significant difference sound or in rocking out a crowd?

Personally I probably wouldn't touch a mix I was already happy with. As soon as I've got it so I don't really hear the mix and am just captured by the sounds in the moment I'm finished forever...

I just happened to be remastering a few things for someone so I bumped up the sampling rate for the benefit of the plugs and voila! A little more niceness...

Lagrange · Post by **Lagrange** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:37 am

mauseoleum wrote:In other words, at least with eXT1.4, you'd get a funny syncopated mess if you export 44k at say 96k and have arps hooked to midichannels.

I think somebody should transfer this to the developer. Such behaviour should be prevented/corrected in XT2 (imho).

Which is the same basic issue with cubase audio file alignement when changing rates.. Something to look out for in your individual host/effects setup and audio alignment scheme..

L

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:50 am

Just out of curiousity did anyone ever post A/B examples of this method? If so, on what page roundabouts should I be looking? I was going to experiment this weekend, but woke up Saturday too sick to do anything productive.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:53 am

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote:Just out of curiousity did anyone ever post A/B examples of this method?

no. it was sort of agreed the difference was just too clear and no one bothered.

besides that it's too damn easy to DIY on just about any host.

you only need one track. not even a whole mix.

xtp · Post by **xtp** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:05 am

My interest I guess is more 'academic' as they say.

More so to do with the information stored in the 16bit file. I couldn't figure how a file containing only 16bit data could be enlarged without areas of bits reading '0', or, unless the algorithm duplicated existing information, or

, generated some form of new or extra data extraneous to any audio that existed in the original file.

However I did find this so it kind of furnished me with the explanation I was after, http://www.aslgroup.com/dcs/upandover.htm the yellow bit on the side contains the crux of the matter.

Roll on Quad-Core I guess.

edit: Instead of wiffling on too much, I think I'll just test it out. Cheers.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:23 am

I would've uploaded examples, but for a few reasons I haven't: first, like Kingston says, you might as well try it yourself, with even a teeny bit of data. Second, by the time I bounce outmy stems and bring them back in, I always wind up doing a little bit of extra mixing, so it's never a fair A/B comparison. Best to just try it yourself and see if the extra work, CPU and HD space is worth it for you. I'm pleased with the results so far.

Dayl · Post by **Dayl** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:46 am

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote:Just out of curiousity did anyone ever post A/B examples of this method? If so, on what page roundabouts should I be looking? I was going to experiment this weekend, but woke up Saturday too sick to do anything productive.

Yeah mate, kinda.

Search the page Here

and at the bottom of the page Here

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:55 am

Oh yes, forgot about those samples: "EatShitMrShy.mp3"!!

Ah...good times.

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Mon Apr 09, 2007 10:00 pm

A blind A/B comparison of this technique here:

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=174620

Vote away folks!

The Upsampling Your Mix Thread