KVR Audio

kylen · Post by **kylen** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:06 am

If that's the concern send them 3 tracks...just a thought.

dusted william · Post by **dusted william** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:08 am

...oh BTW.

Congrats on a finished album, that must be an awesome feeling.

dw

xander · Post by **xander** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:22 am

Kingston wrote:
xander wrote:or Waves R-verb??

the worst reverb on the market currently? uhmh.. well go right ahead.

KINGSTON!

Please tell us why! Your public wants to know!~!~!

Must I employ the services of our resident bulldog Marduck to get you to respond!!

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:25 am

I just really don't like the sound at all. it's grainy, it's oldschool, it's grainy oldschool digital sounding. at least in comparison to variverb or CSR.

many disagree surely.

xander · Post by **xander** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:30 am

Fair enough -- but the way you said it felt like you were implying this was accepted public fact. I just wanted to know so I wouldn't cry too much after having spent all my money

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:32 am

xander wrote:but the way you said it felt like you were implying this was accepted public fact.

of course it's not. I think the only accepted public fact on KVR is that it was a a Digitech Talker on Cher's Believe.

...and even that has been proven wrong.

Dayl · Post by **Dayl** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:38 am

Yeah, Nice work on the album completion duffy!

As for this thread.... man...plant a seed, watch it grow. Some bear fruit....

So Audiomove or R8brain (free)

Which one am I going to school with.

And am I going to improve my 44/32 samples by increasing from 44 to 96?.

(yup I started using the 32 float instead of 16bits for samples and audio tracks)

xander · Post by **xander** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:44 am

Kingston wrote:
xander wrote:but the way you said it felt like you were implying this was accepted public fact.
of course it's not. I think the only accepted public fact on KVR is that it was a a Digitech Talker on Cher's Believe.

...and even that has been proven wrong.

+1

egbert · Post by **egbert** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:44 am

Just on the upsampling thing: Say you have a project in Cubase SX 3/4 with a set of associated audio files - all recorded at 44.1kHz. If you then upsample them to 96 kHz (ie create copies at the new rate), can you simply substitute them for the original files (using same folder, same names having renamed the folder full of 44.1 kHz versions) and change the project sample rate to 96 kHz?

If Cubase SX will accept the new files and load them up on the project page, will all the edits etc remain correctly aligned in time?

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:00 am

egbert wrote:If Cubase SX will accept the new files and load them up on the project page, will all the edits etc remain correctly aligned in time?

nope. the alignment will be completely messed up, if it even works at all. would be a nice feature surely though.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:05 am

Kingston wrote:
egbert wrote:If Cubase SX will accept the new files and load them up on the project page, will all the edits etc remain correctly aligned in time?
nope. the alignment will be completely messed up, if it even works at all. would be a nice feature surely though.

I've done this before. I think if you change the project's sample rate and say "No" to "leave files at original sample position", it might work. Might have to delete Cubase's .peak files from the "images" folder too. But it's trés dangerous. I might try a test of this, just for the funk of it.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:07 am

bduffy wrote:I think if you change the project's sample rate and say "No" to "leave files at original sample position",

problem is the original sample positions no longer correspond to the audio edits. cubase just sees a longer file.

egbert · Post by **egbert** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:14 am

Kingston wrote:
bduffy wrote:I think if you change the project's sample rate and say "No" to "leave files at original sample position",
problem is the original sample positions no longer correspond to the audio edits. cubase just sees a longer file.

Yep that is what I expected - audio/midi hosts use midi clock based time alignment for some events but time alignment must be sample based with audio - to some extent at least. All sample number references in edits would be thrown by a rate change.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:19 am

Kingston wrote:
bduffy wrote:I think if you change the project's sample rate and say "No" to "leave files at original sample position",
problem is the original sample positions no longer correspond to the audio edits. cubase just sees a longer file.

Oh yeah, the edits. Forgot about that!

kylen · Post by **kylen** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:07 am

bduffy wrote: So who was freakin' over Ferox? Was that Kylen? What are you lovin' so much about this thing?

Yep that was me. I kinda grew up with that kinda sound on my sound-on-sound decks and echoplex. It's a nice thick sweet sound that you get out of 1/4" reel tape. You can push into the "preamps" using RecLevel if you want some nasty grit but I don't usually.

For example I've got a Ferox set up like this:
Feedback 30%
Tapespeed 18%
Saturation 15%
Hysteresis 35%
Noise -58dB
I/II yellow switch == on
(green switch below it is on also)
RecLevel is set so the meter doesn't go into the red, that can add grit if you want.

I've tried a bunch of tape sat plugs and this is the 1st one that felt good and made sense to me...A+ at 96KHz sounds mighty fine.

Having said that I gotta compare Tapebus at 96KHz using Kingston's generous preset.

The Upsampling Your Mix Thread