KVR Audio

Sam@Megablastic · Post by **Sam@Megablastic** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:57 am

Wouldn't it be easier to get your Cubase project and go Save project to new folder...save as "Project name 96khz".

But before you save turn off all the fx, then after you save go to the new project folder and convert all the wav's to 96khz.

Then load up the 96khz version of the project and turn on the fx on the tracks you want to bounce

so that you don't go over your cpu.

Dayl · Post by **Dayl** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:34 am

@Duffy.

With that in mind..tommorrow is going to be fun, I'll start converting a couple of projects then.

But for now, I have a bunch of family staying as my girl is aparantaly due (over) to give birth in the next 48hrs, so I must entertain then with....
hmmm.... my new found sample rate conversion knowledge. They are all bound to be dazzled

Provided that the birth of my new born child doesn't interrupt my work,

I should be able to make some headway on this upsample thing. Being able to give your samples more of a beating sounds great!

Till then Manimal!

@Sam
Hi sam, we were discussing the cubase conversions and by the sounds of things the app has a bit to be desired in this field. Interesting. All will be revealed in the mix though!

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:37 am

Sam@Megablastic wrote:Wouldn't it be easier to get your Cubase project and go Save project to new folder...save as "Project name 96khz".

But before you save turn off all the fx, then after you save go to the new project folder and convert all the wav's to 96khz.

Then load up the 96khz version of the project and turn on the fx on the tracks you want to bounce so that you don't go over your cpu.

Well, two things here: First, I think we already figured earlier that Cubase probably wouldn't like it if you processed the files offline; it could lead to completely misinterpreting them, their start times could be all off, and any edits based on the master wave files could be screwed up.

Second, seeing as your CPU is going to throttle, you might as well bounce your stuff down to the simplest elements possible. Your mix is basically 95% finished, this is just the final polish. It's actually quite relaxing working with stems, no 67 tracks to deal with anymore!

If I followed you correctly...

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:40 am

@Dayl: Holy crap, you're having a kid!!! Wow, congratulations! Amazing. So, of course, you're reading up on sample rate conversions...

Best of luck to you with that! Let us know how it goes.

Dayl · Post by **Dayl** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:41 am

Ok..now Im outta here, but you are going to have to explain stems to me Duffy.

Mix down parts? Drums, rythym, Fx, etc???

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:44 am

Dayl wrote:Ok..now Im outta here, but you are going to have to explain stems to me Duffy.

Mix down parts? Drums, rythym, Fx, etc???

OK, one more before bed...

"Stems" are just stereo groups of your musical sections, like; all drums and percussion = 1 stem; bass = 1 stem; guitars = 1 stem; vocals = 1 stem. I don't know if you use Group Channels in Cubase, same idea; just get everything to its lowest common denominator.

Making sense?

bool · Post by **bool** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:45 am

Groups, usually. Those that are logical units - and usually have their own group processing. I.e. drums, bass(es), synths(a), synths(b - e.g. diff fx), vox, backing ...

Stems for mastering are usually 4 and different than what I just said.

..... ah, there, he was faster ...

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:47 am

No, yours is better.

Sam@Megablastic · Post by **Sam@Megablastic** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:57 am

Dayl wrote:@Duffy.

With that in mind..tommorrow is going to be fun, I'll start converting a couple of projects then.

But for now, I have a bunch of family staying as my girl is aparantaly due (over) to give birth in the next 48hrs, so I must entertain then with....
hmmm.... my new found sample rate conversion knowledge. They are all bound to be dazzled

Provided that the birth of my new born child doesn't interrupt my work, I should be able to make some headway on this upsample thing. Being able to give your samples more of a beating sounds great!

Till then Manimal!

@Sam
Hi sam, we were discussing the cubase conversions and by the sounds of things the app has a bit to be desired in this field. Interesting. All will be revealed in the mix though!

You misunderstood me

I meant when I said convert wav's to 96khz to use R8brain pro as Cubase does suck a lot with converting.

Congrats on being a dad

To be honest when I'm going to work at 88khz I start at 88khz, I find the restrictions good for comitting to an edit rather than messing around all the time he he.

Dayl · Post by **Dayl** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:00 am

Sam@Megablastic wrote: You misunderstood me I meant when I said convert wav's to 96khz to use R8brain pro as Cubase does suck a lot with converting.

Hi sam, yes I did, sorry

Dayl · Post by **Dayl** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:05 am

bduffy wrote:
Dayl wrote:Ok..now Im outta here, but you are going to have to explain stems to me Duffy.

Mix down parts? Drums, rythym, Fx, etc???
OK, one more before bed...

"Stems" are just stereo groups of your musical sections, like; all drums and percussion = 1 stem; bass = 1 stem; guitars = 1 stem; vocals = 1 stem. I don't know if you use Group Channels in Cubase, same idea; just get everything to its lowest common denominator.

Making sense?

Cool, in fact great! I have all this going on in folders so now I have a name for it!
Not I have used stems before although common sense should have pointed me in that direction.

Sweet.

Ok, I have to go..need to somehow detach myself for the KVR matrix.

Ahh pecan pie! that'll do it!

kylen · Post by **kylen** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 6:48 pm

Happy Baby Birthday Day !!!

xtp · Post by **xtp** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 8:47 pm

Hi, I've tried to wade thru this thread but it got a bit testy in the middle.

Have I got this right. Are you saying you can record and work in one rate, say 16bit 44hz, then change the sample rate to say 32bit 88hz for the master and it will make an improvement?

If you are could someone explain to me how that works, because I am trying to figure out where the extra data would come from.

At the moment my thoughts work along this line :: Analogy ::

If i had a box and filled it to the top with kids toys, then got another box twice the size and transferred the toys to the new box, I would have a bigger box with the same amount of toys in it.

I would be happy for someone to correct my understanding on these matters.

cheers in advance.

-----------------------------------------

EDIT:: after reading some info on upsampling & oversampling my next question would be , how does it sound when eventually the upsampled sound is again reduced to 16bit 44hz to be made cd-ready.

Does anybody have a 16bit original *.wav file and then a upsampled *.wav, and then a downsampled to 16bit *.wav, of the upsampled version.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 9:35 pm

If you currently work at 88/24, then you're fine; you're already enjoying the benefits of your effects working at a higher sample rate, which is the whole point of this excercise: for the last stage of mixing and/or mastering, you get the mix's sample rate up, so the effects are working in higher detail, and you will benefit from a higher-quality sound.

I think of the anlaogy like this: Your mix is a story that you've written, and now it's going to be read aloud in front of an audience; you have the choice of it being read by an English teacher, who will do a good enough job, or you can get experienced vocal talent to do it, adding that extra flourish to the chapters!

Basically, we're talking about imparting that last 10% of clarity to a mix or master. What I'm doing, right this second, is bouncing down basic stems of my 48/32 song, with the bus channel's FX turned off, then I upsample those stems to 96khz, bring them back into a 96khz project, load the FX (that I've saved) back onto those channels, maybe do a little extra mixing there (kind of inevitable) and export a 96khz mix from there. Now you have a higher-quality mix that the mastering plugin will have to work at 96k too, in more detail, so you'll get a better quality 44k master at the end.

Phew! Hope that helps.

Lagrange · Post by **Lagrange** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 9:39 pm

I like the toy box analogy! Heres the theory of upsampling via this thread. The toys in the 1st box are actually is higher than they look and when putting them into the 2nd box you actually see how hi the level is.

To make it really simple, some effects sound better when used at higher sample rates. In addition, it seems that audio files that have been rendered or converted at/to higher rates will sound thiker or shinyer when being eq'd. You probably won't have any problems though as you work at pretty high rate to begin with

L

The Upsampling Your Mix Thread