Pro-L - do you use Oversampling? it seems not always better!

[Caine123]

hi guys, i enabled oversampling with x8 mostly cause i always thought it would export my project in a higher quality but now i read this on fabfilter page

" There are only two small drawbacks to oversampling: it increases CPU usage, and it can introduce a very slight pre-ring due to the phase-linear filtering that is needed. Generally this effect is so small that it's inaudible, but it's good to be aware of this and not blindly assume that oversampling is always better."

now im wondering would you recommend it better be off to stay more true to the project you export? or do you leave it on?

thx


EDIT:
just did a quick test

No Oversampling
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/wn1gwilp ... 1dxsh&dl=0

8x Oversampling
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/unln7rpj ... 6raii&dl=0

Both Waveforms

[Junolab]

Oversampling is not always better. I've read some explanations by some experienced people, and it gets super technical at a level I don't understand. In short, do what you believe sounds the best. Oversampling is great, but it's massively overexposed as a problem in online communities. Many worldwide hits have been made with tons of aliasing and old plugins, so don't overthink it.

In short, try to train yourself to hear the problems; if you don't hear it, then do no actions to solve a problem you cannot hear. Some even recognise aliasing with "warm" and "analogue"...

[ramseysounds]

No I dont use it. I dont have Pro L

[Masterofdisaster]

i always master at 192k (i upsample any audio i recieve; and downsample again at the very end to whatever format is needed) so there is really no need for oversampling most of the time. unless im clipping, then i do use 2x.
in fact i often use 2x on pro-l aswell, but im not quite sure if im doing myself a service or disservice there, will have to a/b a bit more i think.

[kmonkey]

now im wondering would you recommend it better be off to stay more true to the project you export? or do you leave it on?

There is no specific rule set for this. It solely depends on you and your work. It is quite simple actually.

If oversampling ProL on your specific song sounds fine/better then go for it, if not then don't go for it. As simple as that.

It really is application-specific and only you have the last say in this.

It is not as if "I enable oversampling thus my song must be better" - that is quite an absurd way of looking at it.

If you think about it, you can't name not even one song that didn't make up the chart because it wasn't (or was) oversampled. My point is - technicality is important but not AS important as people these days think it is. Real artistry stays in your song.

[legendCNCD]

If you think about it, you can't name not even one song that didn't make up the chart because it wasn't (or was) oversampled. My point is - technicality is important but not AS important as people these days think it is. Real artistry stays in your song.

This here. Tracks made on 8 and 12 bit samplers etc. Its the track itself, the music that counts.

[Masterofdisaster]

If you think about it, you can't name not even one song that didn't make up the chart because it wasn't (or was) oversampled. My point is - technicality is important but not AS important as people these days think it is. Real artistry stays in your song.

This here. Tracks made on 8 and 12 bit samplers etc. Its the track itself, the music that counts.

well if youre refering to hardware samplers, then the point is moot, there is no need to upsample those as aliasing and nyquist/aa filters are purely digital issues. and ofc bit-depth has nothing to do with sample rate anyhow.

[ramseysounds]

If you think about it, you can't name not even one song that didn't make up the chart because it wasn't (or was) oversampled. My point is - technicality is important but not AS important as people these days think it is. Real artistry stays in your song.

This here. Tracks made on 8 and 12 bit samplers etc. Its the track itself, the music that counts.

This. All day long. Upsample, downsample, whatever. If your song sucks, your song sucks. Too many people put emphasis on equipment these days, because the market is SATURATED. Concentrate on song writing. Cream will rise to the top.

[Masterofdisaster]

and if your song Doesnt suck - would the extra bit of quality matter or not? the logic is a bit flawed saying "if its bad its bad". yes, thats true. but if its good, can it be slightly marginally better? cleaner? less digital noise/artifacts? ive spent countless hours doing a/b testing comparing mastering at 192k vs mastering at 44k, using identical plugin settings.
both masters end up at 44k/16bit. but on one, all processing was done in 192k. time and time again, does the 192k band limited version come on top. very slightly marginally at times, but always does. ive sent out both to clients and have them pick which one they think sounds better. ive asked friends to compare, and each time, the 192k version wins. why? because aliasing and the nyquist "roof" is not an issue anymore. even if its ever so marginal, using things like compressors, clippers, and limiters, in a 192k environment (regardless of any oversampling) just gives you a better quality end result, no matter if you downsample to 44/16 at the very end. this is a FACT. but i digress. this comment would be better suited in the 44k vs 48k thread, as im not really talking about oversampling here. cause oversampling in and of itself can be a bad thing.

[Frankie.T]

i always master at 192k (i upsample any audio i recieve; and downsample again at the very end to whatever format is needed) so there is really no need for oversampling most of the time. unless im clipping, then i do use 2x.
in fact i often use 2x on pro-l aswell, but im not quite sure if im doing myself a service or disservice there, will have to a/b a bit more i think.

Do you realize upsample first, downsample later it's what oversampling does? You are just doing it manually

[ramseysounds]

Ask a punter out of his box on a Friday night dancing in a club if he prefers oversampling or not

[Masterofdisaster]

i always master at 192k (i upsample any audio i recieve; and downsample again at the very end to whatever format is needed) so there is really no need for oversampling most of the time. unless im clipping, then i do use 2x.
in fact i often use 2x on pro-l aswell, but im not quite sure if im doing myself a service or disservice there, will have to a/b a bit more i think.

Do you realize upsample first, downsample later it's what oversampling does? You are just doing it manually

no. incorrect. as working in a high sample rate, means plugins doesnt have to internally oversample.
i control the upsampling at the very first point, then every bit of processing is in 192k, then i control the very last piece of downsampling as well as the ONLY AA filter. There is simply just one AA filter at the very end. Compared to each time there is oversampling, there is an additional AA filter.
theres a big big difference doing it like this, compared to working in a low sample rate and have each plugin do it itself. plus, there are plugins that doesnt have internal oversampling. either way, its better to do it this way, you just have to upsample once, and downsample once. thus reducing the instances of resampling by alot. less digital artifacts.
also, alot of plugins uses linear phase AA filters, thus each instance of oversampling will give you the nasty artifacts that CAN come using linear phase filters.
with that said I DO use linear phase LP filter at the end of my processing chain, but there is just ONE instance of it. as compared to oversampling a bunch of plugins, where there is many, thus causing more audible digitial artifacts.

[ramseysounds]

@masterofdisaster

Please post a link to a completed song done in the 2 different ways you describe and let the people decide

Without listening, I guarantee there will be no audible difference. It’s just for the purists. IMO

[Masterofdisaster]

@masterofdisaster

Please post a link to a completed song done in the 2 different ways you describe and let the people decide

Without listening, I guarantee there will be no audible difference. It’s just for the purists. IMO

you mean completed masters? sure, i can absolutely post 2 different masters; one made in 44k, and one made in 192k. and then let you guys judge which one sounds better. im currently working on a master for a client, and i will ask his permission to do this.

[Caine123]

just did a quick test

No Oversampling
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/wn1gwilp ... 1dxsh&dl=0

8x Oversampling
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/unln7rpj ... 6raii&dl=0

Both Waveforms