wow, bouncing down Diva in 192khz

[ouroboros]

The plugins I tend to find benefit the most though are much older ones. Like Albino 3, 88/96khz makes a HUGE difference when using the saturation knob in the filter, clears up an aweful lot of aliasing.

That's my experience, too. If it makes a difference, I hear it in the saturation and distortion in older plugs get cleaning up. It makes Synth1 a whole new plug

[olikana]

Given how many people here have spoken if favor of the higher rates, I was wondering if anyone could provide x/y samples of music at say 48k, 96k and 192k. I am very curious about it and would like to see what others have been able to do.

Thanks.

2 examples i made some time ago with tal-Elek7ro (all sounds including drums) at different resolutions 192-48-96.
http://soundcloud.com/olikana/tal-elek7ro-test
the tracks were originally composed at 48k so they might sound better at 48....but the point is how different the synth sounds at different resolutions.
keep in mind that tal-elek7ro like any synth released before Diva does not have 0 delay feedback filters. ...so the filters will sound sloppy at 44 and more precise in the shaping at 192. and also sounds using FM tend to sound different. these differences at different sampling rates happen for any sofsynth i ever tried before Diva.

diva with 0 delay feedback filters and antialiased FM shuold sound more consistant at different sampling rates and i don't expect a great deal of difference at different sampling rates....but i will make a test this weekend.

[bmrzycki]

This thread reminded me of an article by the ogg vorbis folks in regards to 192kHz Apple audio:
http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

u r completely missiing the point and your post is completely irrelevant.

the higher sampler rate helps plugins perform their computations in more efficient manner....providing more accurate results.
it's got nothing to do with just audio playback.

And you completely missed the start of my post: "This thread reminded me of". I didn't say it was directly related. If you don't like it, don't read it. I figured at least 1-2 other people would find it interesting.

[JJBiener]

2 examples i made some time ago with tal-Elek7ro (all sounds including drums) at different resolutions 192-48-96.

the tracks were originally composed at 48k so they might sound better at 48....but the point is how different the synth sounds at different resolutions.
keep in mind that tal-elek7ro like any synth released before Diva does not have 0 delay feedback filters. ...so the filters will sound sloppy at 44 and more precise in the shaping at 192. and also sounds using FM tend to sound different. these differences at different sampling rates happen for any sofsynth i ever tried before Diva.

diva with 0 delay feedback filters and antialiased FM shuold sound more consistant at different sampling rates and i don't expect a great deal of difference at different sampling rates....but i will make a test this weekend.

Thanks, Olikana. This is exactly what I was looking for.

After listening several times on my best equipment, I have to say that the differences are so slight and subtle that I could barely distinguish them. I also couldn't say which rate was "better".

Now this could very easily be me. I spent quite a few years in bands playing very loud music, so I may have lost the ability to hear the frequencies that matter here. In any case, I don't have any great motivation to upgrade at this point. Interesting thread though.

[olikana]

i made a little quick test with Diva and as expected (cos of the 0 delay feedback filters and atiliased FM) there's not much difference at different resolutions. . i only tested 44-96-192 (my card doesn't go further).
only big difference the "high hat" (made with the white noise from the moog module)....that defenetly changes with the resolution (some element disappears from the high hat sound making it sound quieter and quieter- i hope it is not aliasing).


anyway here it is
same clips, no effects whatsoever, 44 then 96 then 192
then at the end a 44 vs 192 comparison with no high hat included to prove that was really the only thing changing in previous clips. any other differences, if any, are very hard to spot.

http://soundcloud.com/olikana/divatesti ... 2then44vs1

and the simple "highhat patch" changing at different resolutions is this one
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/50331508/simplenoisehat.h2p

conclusion : i don't see any point to run Diva in an oversampled host unless u wanna risk encountering some odd behaviour. there is no big differences like in other synths .
an "insane goodness" option would be nice....if not no way i'll be running my host at 96khz or 192khz for hardly any difference.

[David Else]

thanks olikana! can you make the example file FLAC download enabled on soundcloud? also, what SRC you using?

very keen to hear developer's detailed feedback, this thread has exploded

[News From The Sky]

You guys just want "insane goodness" because of the name. If the exact same feature was called "very sensible garbage" I bet you wouldn't like it as much.

[fluxmind]

You guys just want "insane goodness" because of the name. If the exact same feature was called "very sensible garbage" I bet you wouldn't like it as much.

very keen to hear developer's detailed feedback, this thread has exploded

No, it just turned into nonsense as usually
192khz gimme a break Day and night differences, come on probably equipment choking, that's your difference, and all that 192khz for what ? this

[ddeez]

My threads do have a tendency to explode I've been told I have that talent.

Urs i notice you've been mum on a response. Could you tell me this at least, while you were testing the insane goodness render setting was there a noticeable difference in quality of sound?

[Urs]

My threads do have a tendency to explode I've been told I have that talent.

Urs i notice you've been mum on a response. Could you tell me this at least, while you were testing the insane goodness render setting was there a noticeable difference in quality of sound?

We had a bug or soemthing and the filter would do strange things

I'm a bit on the fence with quality settings that only work on mixdown. It makes me feel having something "inferior" when I play live. And that I definately want to avoid.

[ddeez]

Thanks much for the response Urs!

I may be off in this but I think I speak for a lot of people (most users of soft synths including yours) when I say the vast majority of people who produce with them don't use them live. So in my humblest of humble opinions I don't feel that should be a major concern.

I would actually get a special feeling being able to set it to an insane setting when bouncing down (not kidding) knowing that I was going the distance in getting the best sound possible.


And lol @ the face haha. So does that mean there was a noticeable difference in quality for the better when the filter wasn't acting up?

Thanks as always for the discussion my friend.

[penguinfromdeep]

Maybe it could some kind of secret switch ... Only for those in the 'know' ...

[Howard]

...the vast majority of people who produce with them don't use them live. So in my humblest of humble opinions I don't feel that should be a major concern.

I tentatively agree with that.

[ddeez]

Thanks Howard!!

[Gamma-UT]

I would actually get a special feeling being able to set it to an insane setting when bouncing down (not kidding) knowing that I was going the distance in getting the best sound possible.

Personally, I prefer to get the sound I got while mixing during rendering rather than something different that just gives me the added warmth of confirmation bias.