The Upsampling Your Mix Thread
-
Colonel Flashback Colonel Flashback https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=57766
- KVRian
- 898 posts since 12 Feb, 2005 from Green Man Inn
upsampling a thread?
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
Ah! FWIW, I ultimately didn't wind up going with too much upsampling on this album; I think the whole stem-mixing-conversion thing was just one process too many for my mixes, and I wound up going back to the original 44/48k mixes. I'll be checking out higher samplerates when I get a better monitoring solution and gear; for now, it's inconclusive on my end. (Much to Shy's delight!) 
-
- KVRAF
- 2049 posts since 18 Sep, 2003 from Seattle USA
I just don't really have the firepower right now - try throwing Nebula2/3 into the mix and my cpu is just begging for a blue screen so it can sleep...bduffy wrote:I'll be checking out higher samplerates when I get a better monitoring solution and gear; for now, it's inconclusive on my end. (Much to Shy's delight!)
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
Totally. I don't even bother using Nebula in Cubase at home, maybe just for offline processing. I can't imagine at 96khz! 
-
- KVRAF
- 8684 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
Nah, because as always in the past, the moment there is an improvement in PC power, there will be an improvement in plugin CPU use and/or another imrovement in recording quality and consequent CPU useage. In fact plugins are usually ahead of PC development.
I just find it easier to sit outside of the "need everything and need it now" race. I used to be happy with CD quality at 16/44.1 so no real reason for me not to be happy with it now. It's more a matter of me getting my mixing/mastering skills better rather than recording at 20 times the resolution I need. I still produce turds...just that sometimes they're really shiney and highly polished turds.
I just find it easier to sit outside of the "need everything and need it now" race. I used to be happy with CD quality at 16/44.1 so no real reason for me not to be happy with it now. It's more a matter of me getting my mixing/mastering skills better rather than recording at 20 times the resolution I need. I still produce turds...just that sometimes they're really shiney and highly polished turds.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
Yeah, it's not worth it, right now, to worry about that stuff. If you let yourself get wrapped up in the "x-fancy-solution-will-make-me-sound-like-a-pro" race, you can just get lost in details; I'm always a little surprised when I go back to my 44-16/Cakewalk Pro Audio/Soundfont mixes, they're often much better than I expect them to be, probably because I was inspired and excited, instead of sweating over sample rates and whether to use a lowcut or a low shelf, etc, etc.kritikon wrote:Nah, because as always in the past, the moment there is an improvement in PC power, there will be an improvement in plugin CPU use and/or another imrovement in recording quality and consequent CPU useage. In fact plugins are usually ahead of PC development.
I just find it easier to sit outside of the "need everything and need it now" race. I used to be happy with CD quality at 16/44.1 so no real reason for me not to be happy with it now. It's more a matter of me getting my mixing/mastering skills better rather than recording at 20 times the resolution I need. I still produce turds...just that sometimes they're really shiney and highly polished turds.
I think I'm better now, for sure, but I do forget to just sit down and write; worry about that shite later.
-
- KVRist
- 45 posts since 9 Dec, 2006
Ok this was a very interesting thread and a thread which finally made me understand how going from 96Kz-->44.1 is better then 44.1-->44.1 (synths/effects don't have perfect algorithms so the higher the sample rates the less these imperfections will show up). Anyway, I like to do all my mixing and sequencing in the same project, so working in 96Kz is not possible, since i use around 6-8 synths and a lot of effects at the same time. Freezing fixes some issues, but at 96Khz, even with freezing I would not be able to work normally. So i designed a solution for this. Let me know what the ups and downs are for this:
1) I work as usual at 48.8, 24bit. Finish the sequencing, finish the mixing, etc etc.
2) I unfreeze any tracks which I have, because they are at 48.8, then I switch my project into 96Khz.
3) I export the whole project as 96Khz, and since I am not exporting "live" or "realtime" (not sure the exact name for it), nuendo is able to export correctly.
So now I am confused about samples. I understand that if I have an audio track with a sample of 44.1 and i convert the project into 96, it is going to ask me to convert the sample. I know nuendo's engine is not good for this so I would use the voxengo tool (r8brain). My questions is about samples i use in sampletank. Do I have to use 96 Khz samples, or does sampletank convert them to 96Kz when you are playing them on the fly?
It seems like they are played at correct speed, so they are definitely getting converted somewhere. But where??
Anyway, thanx for your time and let me know if there are any faults/ups/downs for my method (of madness
)
1) I work as usual at 48.8, 24bit. Finish the sequencing, finish the mixing, etc etc.
2) I unfreeze any tracks which I have, because they are at 48.8, then I switch my project into 96Khz.
3) I export the whole project as 96Khz, and since I am not exporting "live" or "realtime" (not sure the exact name for it), nuendo is able to export correctly.
So now I am confused about samples. I understand that if I have an audio track with a sample of 44.1 and i convert the project into 96, it is going to ask me to convert the sample. I know nuendo's engine is not good for this so I would use the voxengo tool (r8brain). My questions is about samples i use in sampletank. Do I have to use 96 Khz samples, or does sampletank convert them to 96Kz when you are playing them on the fly?
It seems like they are played at correct speed, so they are definitely getting converted somewhere. But where??
Anyway, thanx for your time and let me know if there are any faults/ups/downs for my method (of madness
)-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
I'm not sure about the sampletank thing, although I believe samples are automatically played back at the higher rate by the sampler, but if you're working at 48k, then you should be exporting from Nuendo at 48k, no 96k; you want r8brain to handle the upsampling duties, not Nuendo; otherwise you're doing a double-conversion there, and as you pointed out, you're trying to avoid Nuendo's conversion.
What I found is you can't just "flip" the same project to 96k, with your non-destructive clips, etc; you'll need to export you audio tracks/stems and start a new project( you can save your mixer settings if you need to.) And with the CPU needed, you're better off with a few stems, coz you're going to have to bounce again, I'm telling you!
And, I must add, it wasn't ultimately worth the trouble for me. You might want to make sure your plugins are going to benefit from the massive upsampling, otherwise, you might make your tracks worse. I wound up going with my 44/48k mixes for my final album, it was just too many processes, if you ask me.
Good luck!
What I found is you can't just "flip" the same project to 96k, with your non-destructive clips, etc; you'll need to export you audio tracks/stems and start a new project( you can save your mixer settings if you need to.) And with the CPU needed, you're better off with a few stems, coz you're going to have to bounce again, I'm telling you!
And, I must add, it wasn't ultimately worth the trouble for me. You might want to make sure your plugins are going to benefit from the massive upsampling, otherwise, you might make your tracks worse. I wound up going with my 44/48k mixes for my final album, it was just too many processes, if you ask me.
Good luck!
-
- KVRist
- 45 posts since 9 Dec, 2006
I understand what you are saying but im doing it differently.
Here is what i was thinking.
I put all my samples in one subfolder under my project. They are all 48.8. I work on my project, sequence it and mix it. When I am ready I start up the sample rate conversion utility and convert all the samples into 96Khz. (+make backup of 48.8Khz). Then I load the project and switch to 96kHz and if all the samples are the same name they should all be loaded automatically. I them render out as 96Khz. and this way nuendo does not convert anything. This is, by the way, a theory. I have not tested this yet. Im stuck trying to fix my project right now cuz switchin back and forth between 96 and 48 did something to one of my presets.
Anyway I think the process should not be too long. I would never export each track and then open another project and load the each .wav and open the effects.... etc etc. That is way too long.
Here is what i was thinking.
I put all my samples in one subfolder under my project. They are all 48.8. I work on my project, sequence it and mix it. When I am ready I start up the sample rate conversion utility and convert all the samples into 96Khz. (+make backup of 48.8Khz). Then I load the project and switch to 96kHz and if all the samples are the same name they should all be loaded automatically. I them render out as 96Khz. and this way nuendo does not convert anything. This is, by the way, a theory. I have not tested this yet. Im stuck trying to fix my project right now cuz switchin back and forth between 96 and 48 did something to one of my presets.
Anyway I think the process should not be too long. I would never export each track and then open another project and load the each .wav and open the effects.... etc etc. That is way too long.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
I thought you might be doing that, and I know I tried that myself; I think you may run into some problems if you have edit-clips based on other waves files, or if you've got offline effects on them. Give it a go, I'm curious what will happen. For some reason, I didn't use this method myself, but I can't remember what happened.