The Upsampling Your Mix Thread
-
- KVRist
- 279 posts since 27 Jun, 2007 from M33chigan.
As of today, This technique is more trouble than it's worth for most people. When computers catch up, it seems likely that the higher sample rates will be the way to go for some very valid reasons mentioned in this thread.
-
- KVRist
- 45 posts since 9 Dec, 2006
ok, i decided not to do this on my current project, because i realized sampletank has one data directory for all its files and i use the same samples in multiple projects. so i would have to create another directoy just for this track, just for sampletank. So im going to try it in my future projects, (like in next couple of weeks), but for now i am not messing with me existing stuff so it does not break it
-
- KVRAF
- 5629 posts since 22 Sep, 2005
Just on you mentioning it you know I had try it! Total chop suey!bduffy wrote:Totally. I don't even bother using Nebula in Cubase at home, maybe just for offline processing. I can't imagine at 96khz!
L
-
- KVRian
- 666 posts since 29 Dec, 2006 from Auckland, New Zealand
Man, its been a while since I last posted as I dived back into guitar heavily.
Back into my production again
Must say...this was one of my fav posts.....now where is the 500hz topic
Back into my production again
Must say...this was one of my fav posts.....now where is the 500hz topic
-
- KVRian
- 666 posts since 29 Dec, 2006 from Auckland, New Zealand
hahahatonAP wrote:..so is it just an 'upsampled' bump?Must say...this was one of my fav posts.....
Yeah...some lids are left screwed on....tight.
no bump
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
Sorry to dig this old one out again,but I took on the task and read up till page 25 until my head exploded with all that OT and flaming jazz.
I actually get that upsampling is good for STEM mixing, but since I usually work on a per-track basis in terms of FX (with a lot of individual tracks having tons of sends), it's making dry group stems obsolete. Cause I'd need to render in the FX.
So my question out to Kingston especially: what are my other options?
Since my own projects usually also run through a mastering step, is it okay to render a stereo master in 48/24 (where 99% of my projects are residing at), upsample them with whatever tool I like, reimport them into Wavelab and get on with it?
I'd then only have the problem in Wavelab, since I'm creating an audio montage first and then work "out" from there on the idividual tracks to make an evened out mastering. How to get that one back to CD ready (44/15) with proper trackmarks, etc. Wavelab is a b*tch in that section and tells me on reimport "CD is not valid, some files/markers are off", etc.
And speaking of the tape machine presets provided in this thread:
Can't oversampler plugins be used to just get a similar effect as using "true" upsampled files, or is there really just a small thing missing?
Thanks in advance.
I actually get that upsampling is good for STEM mixing, but since I usually work on a per-track basis in terms of FX (with a lot of individual tracks having tons of sends), it's making dry group stems obsolete. Cause I'd need to render in the FX.
So my question out to Kingston especially: what are my other options?
Since my own projects usually also run through a mastering step, is it okay to render a stereo master in 48/24 (where 99% of my projects are residing at), upsample them with whatever tool I like, reimport them into Wavelab and get on with it?
I'd then only have the problem in Wavelab, since I'm creating an audio montage first and then work "out" from there on the idividual tracks to make an evened out mastering. How to get that one back to CD ready (44/15) with proper trackmarks, etc. Wavelab is a b*tch in that section and tells me on reimport "CD is not valid, some files/markers are off", etc.
And speaking of the tape machine presets provided in this thread:
Can't oversampler plugins be used to just get a similar effect as using "true" upsampled files, or is there really just a small thing missing?
Thanks in advance.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
Hey Compy, If I may add: I don't think it's worth the trouble to do this, personally. Waste of time, IMHO.
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
Wait, you were the one pushing that topic forward though. And now you say it's not worth the trouble?
I mean, I can't really do STEMs due to my mixing technique (I'd have to render the FX channels too, but I wouldn't add additional FX to them), so that leaves me with a master mixdown only.
I'd use a seperate tool for upsampling, though the only thing I'd do with Cubase is to render the file from my 48/24bit to 48/32bit float.
Or were you speaking of something else? What about the oversampling of the mentioned plugins (already while using 44 or 48kHz)?
I mean, I can't really do STEMs due to my mixing technique (I'd have to render the FX channels too, but I wouldn't add additional FX to them), so that leaves me with a master mixdown only.
I'd use a seperate tool for upsampling, though the only thing I'd do with Cubase is to render the file from my 48/24bit to 48/32bit float.
Or were you speaking of something else? What about the oversampling of the mentioned plugins (already while using 44 or 48kHz)?
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
I'm speaking of this thread. Both this and the "500hz trick" thread a renounce completely. They stemmed from a very insecure time in my mixing career, where I was super-stressed out from my job and trying to mix an album, by myself, with the worst computer on the planet, and I was looking for anything to give me an edge. And at the end of the day, the only "egde" I think we need is to trust our ears, instincts and trusted effects and get the job done. The album turned out fine, but we had to dial back in the 500hz, and undo the "tricks" I tried.
I mean, maybe I should try an experiment now that my system is a bit better, but I just honestly had to admit I didn't find any gains whatsoever in my mixes/masters with this method. In fact, I had to resubmit and replace an upsampled final mix, as it sounded weak compared to the others; just one too many times around the post, if you ask me.
IIRC, Kingston uses this method because he uses a lot of distortion in his mixes, so there would be a more tangible benefit from upsampling. His ears are better than mine probably, so I'm sure there's a difference if he says so, but not for my mixes, to my ears, anyway.
And I feel kinda bad about raking Shy over the coals for calling us on this one. He was right: it's a waste of time.
I mean, maybe I should try an experiment now that my system is a bit better, but I just honestly had to admit I didn't find any gains whatsoever in my mixes/masters with this method. In fact, I had to resubmit and replace an upsampled final mix, as it sounded weak compared to the others; just one too many times around the post, if you ask me.
IIRC, Kingston uses this method because he uses a lot of distortion in his mixes, so there would be a more tangible benefit from upsampling. His ears are better than mine probably, so I'm sure there's a difference if he says so, but not for my mixes, to my ears, anyway.
And I feel kinda bad about raking Shy over the coals for calling us on this one. He was right: it's a waste of time.
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
Leaves the question with oversampling plugins, and why certain engineers prefer recording at 96kHz while using a 2PC engine with outboard hardware inbetween.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
You mean internal oversampling on plugins? That's a perfectly good thing. And what's a 2PC engine?Compyfox wrote:Leaves the question with oversampling plugins, and why certain engineers prefer recording at 96kHz while using a 2PC engine with outboard hardware inbetween.
? Good question bduf..
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
Actually something like that, yes:
Computer 1 (Standard Resulution of the Format Provided) -> Plugins -> Outboard Hardware -> Computer 2 (recording at 96kHz).
Something like this (hope hotlinking is allowed):
So yeah, how do they get their material back down to CD quality? SRC with stuff like r8brain I guess. But I'm not too sure on that. It's kept a secret for ages now.
And back to Oversampling again:
There are a couple of oversampler wrappers floating around on KVR. Would it be advisable to use something like that with an EQ or in case as mentioned earlier inthe thread: tape saturation plugins? Or would that result no suitable results compared to going 96kHz directly?
Excuse my naivety, but fill me in, please. Does the so called and often mentioned "magic" actually really lie in there? Since I never went that far, I'm a bit startled.
Computer 1 (Standard Resulution of the Format Provided) -> Plugins -> Outboard Hardware -> Computer 2 (recording at 96kHz).
Something like this (hope hotlinking is allowed):
So yeah, how do they get their material back down to CD quality? SRC with stuff like r8brain I guess. But I'm not too sure on that. It's kept a secret for ages now.
And back to Oversampling again:
There are a couple of oversampler wrappers floating around on KVR. Would it be advisable to use something like that with an EQ or in case as mentioned earlier inthe thread: tape saturation plugins? Or would that result no suitable results compared to going 96kHz directly?
Excuse my naivety, but fill me in, please. Does the so called and often mentioned "magic" actually really lie in there? Since I never went that far, I'm a bit startled.