KVR Audio

Neon Breath · Post by **Neon Breath** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:40 pm

Did your music suddenly turn better, fantastic and amazing since your 96 switch?

osiris · Post by **osiris** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:43 pm

I just don't see the point if the DAW will downsample it anyway.
I don't see the point if I can run Reaktor at that but also have Predator that I can't set at that. Won't it sound weird?
Along with the drum samples.
This from another forum:
96khz cuts the number of tracks and processing in half on Pro Tools. 192khz half of half. You would need two hd6's linked to mix a modern pop/r&b recording record at 192khz.

@midnight · Post by **@midnight** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:27 pm

Do your plugins that use internal oversampling sound weird?

Same thing as running at a higher sample rate.

Jafo · Post by **Jafo** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:45 pm

PanzerD wrote:
Jafo wrote:Btw, the files are 24-bit flac, so there shouldn't be any weird mp3 artifacts.
Seems more like 32bit .exe. WTF.. where's the real download button?!?

Friggin' 4shared... sorry! You need to click on the light blue button labeled just "Download" in white, not on the "Download 4Sync" button (green text on gray with a big-ass arrow) -- did I mention that 4shared sucks? However, they're free, and they don't re-encode your audio.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 7:25 pm

Placebo? I take the little check box and change the sample rates with the bass plugged in and you are saying what I hear is placebo? Please dial 911 immd as you need medical attention.

Now, a different argument is if it matters once you've got it down to mp3. But cheers to someone who likes what they are doing better than before, really no need for the sonic police to piss in your wheaties.

t3toooo · Post by **t3toooo** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 8:27 pm

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 9:43 pm

jupiter8 · Post by **jupiter8** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:01 pm

This is just silly. Higher samplerates can make a huge difference. It's not placebo at all,not even close. Do note i'm not saying it always will (depends on the plugins) or that it is the most effective way (it isn't) or that it makes sense to record at higher samplerates (it doesn't) ,i'm merely saying that "OMG PLACEBO" is way out of line.

https://www.box.com/shared/vek1fl81vq
Just listen to these 3 mp3s (yes it's clearly audible even when compressed) and tell me higher samplerates can't be beneficial.

EDIT: Ooops my bad,they weren't mp3s. Doesn't really matter,that difference is still going to be clearly audible even when converted to mp3.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:02 pm

I love you jupiter!

jupiter8 · Post by **jupiter8** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:32 pm

hibidy wrote:I love you jupiter!

What,you're just giving it just like that ? No playing hard to get ? Wow that makes me feel really special....

On a more serious note i like to find out for myself instead of just regurgitating what they say on GS and what i've read in Bob Katz books.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 11:05 pm

That's just it. Don't be all hatin', try it for yourself

If you come to the conclusion that there isn't a diff......groovy. Doesn't hurt anything. But last time I checked, when I use an eq, or a tone control, or change mic positions, or whatever I can hear a difference. Why would someone just want to "think" they hear a difference when changing sample rates???????

Anyways, I'd completely given up on it was just going 44.1k because it most definitely is good enough, but I decided to try 48k with this clean install and low and behold, you can switch between the two with the standalone of Markstudiobass2 and there is a pretty obvious difference, both high and low end.

So whatever, but yeah jupiter, I'm always looking the the next "ex"

Jafo · Post by **Jafo** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 3:35 am

jupiter8 wrote:https://www.box.com/shared/vek1fl81vq
Just listen to these 3 mp3s (yes it's clearly audible even when compressed) and tell me higher samplerates can't be beneficial.

Not exactly a proper double-blind test, but there's clearly enough of a difference to show that in some cases a higher sample rate can give better results. Cool -- another tool in the box.

@midnight · Post by **@midnight** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 4:19 am

with regards to DSP, its not a "maybe" or a "placebo" or a "sometimes"

everytime you run a soft synth at a higher sampling rate, it will sound better

everytime you run any analog modeled plugin that has any nonlinearities (and that is most "analog modeled" plugins since like 2003) at a higher sampling rate, it will sound better

its been proven by the scientists already

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 4:22 am

Oh no, so when is the null test going to be brought up?

How do you double blind the test? It's really simple. If you have a synth, or a guitar or whatever, and you are RIGHT IN FRONT of the computer, and you make a simple switch of sample rate, you either ARE going to hear a difference or you are not.

If an idiot sells themselves a cup of dumb-ass if it's that close, that is one thing. Do you not obviously hear it? Well, that is another.

Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah, math, placebo, etc.........whatever.

Btw, please do not embarrass yourself (whoever) by bringing up pebbles or $20,000 power cords, it's not the same thing.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 4:24 am

@midnight wrote:
its been proven by the scientists already

Not the kvr sonic police

They know WAY more than anyone else!

24/96khz