SOLVED: Without exporting, is there a way to convert CWP sample rates?

I had to do that a couple times, and never found an easy solution. I came pretty close by opening up the clips in Sound Forge from the Utilities menu, changing the sample rate, then saving. This worked really well except for Acidized clips, which I had to convert to regular clips and then it was okay. But some files didn't seem to like the process; one issue I remember in particular was a clip that used DSP to reverse the wave.
 
However, the Sound Forge thing got me 90% of the way there and I think would have gotten me 100% of the way there if some of the clips hadn't used complex processes. I'll be interested to hear if anyone has found a simple way to do this.

Re-posting my solution from here:
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/2934357
 
"This is where a 3rd-party sample-conversion application like the free Voxengo R8Brain comes in handy. R8Brain has a batch mode that will create re-sampled copies of all the audio files in place with the original names and add a prefix/suffix to the original files (or delete them if you so choose). Then when you re-open the original project (or a copy of it) with those re-sampled files in the audio folder, SONAR will automatically set the project rate to match the audio it finds, and you're done.
 
Though it does involve using a 3rd-party conversion app, it's by far the fastest and least complicated way of converting a project's sample rate and/or bit depth without altering the project otherwise."
 

One word - Brilliant!  This solution should be a sticky.
 
Thanks again BF.

Cool. Glad to help. I just figured this out a while ago, as I got tired of having to switch my interface to 44.1kHz from my usual 48 to play SONAR demo projects.

Yes, I could imagine things might get screwy in a project with non-destructive clip edits/FX/automation in place. I'm not sure how SONAR stores slip-edit and fade locations and such, but if it's by sample position that would be a problem. Unbounced record latency compensation could also throw things off.
 
Caveat emptor. 
 
 
 

Well... after years of wondering if this was possible, I have to say that your solution was about the most painless process imaginable Brundlefly. Thank you.
 
I have a project that I started on a different soundcard that didn't support 88.2 (my chosen, daily sample rate). The audio was nearly all scratch takes, but there was a ridiculous amount of synth programming, automation, tempo maps, some V-Vocal clips, plenty of fades, etc etc.
 
It took all of 2 minutes to open R8Brain, suss out what options I needed and successfully convert the project without so much as a manual (including the actual time that R8Brain needed for conversion). The next time this process is needed in my world it will require 10 seconds of clicking and 30 seconds of a bathroom break while R8Brain does its thing.
 
And every last edit / automation / midi performance etc is perfectly in place. I could believe that certain processes might not play nice and translate, but I'd like to see a definitive list of what these are. Sonar did complain that a corrupt audio region was found and padded with silence, but I examined and listened to every clip with a microscope and could find no affected regions. This warning disappears after saving the project.
 
I have to agree that this should be a sticky - I've found multiple posts insisting that project sample rate conversion can't be done, or that its problematic and a royal pain at best. The troubling part is that these posts span from a decade ago to very recent - lending credence to the idea that its something best left alone.
 
Realistically, I don't see why this feature isn't integrated into the core application. If Sonar is basing its project sample rate on the files it is loading (which it very apparently is), a Convert Sample Rate Wizard seems a minor endeavor (and very useful!).

Instead of making this a sticky, maybe it would make sense for me to download R8Brain, provide some more details, and turn it into a tip of the week. Thanks all, great suggestions.

The organization of all of the worlds forum-derived information is an active area of interest of mine. The amount of useful data on even the most niche topic is staggering, but it is dwarfed by the amount of noise that must be filtered (conversation, argument, trolls, antiquated answers, duplicate answers, troubleshooting steps, experimental solutions etc).

I like to envision that in the future there will be standard, conversational forums but also a sort of dynamic wiki/faq that is algorithmically generated and very to the point. Perhaps the underlying method would rely on the assistance of a post-voting system, moderator voting and cross referencing of other forums that support the technology. If multiple, valid solutions present themselves for a particular problem ("How do you stop a puppy from chewing your stuff?") then they should be presented with a similarly dynamically generated list of pros / cons / caveats per each solution.

Questions with subjective answers are a bit more difficult to approach, as taste and culture dont particularly march to the same beat as our logical / technical understanding of the universe. But, for each such question there is usually a pretty grounded set of answers defining the problems involved in truly answering it. For example - "What is the best preamp!??!!" Well, technically there is no such... (etc).

Were a user to attempt posting a question that is already well documented, the forum interface itself would kindly direct the user to said documentation (with an option to post the question anyway, were there still confusion).

Perhaps its all poppycock and wishful thinking, but I'd like to believe one of the data giants is working on it in secret.

Sorry to hijack / rant. My coffee is finished and I'm off!

ewb
The organization of all of the worlds forum-derived information is an active area of interest of mine. The amount of useful data on even the most niche topic is staggering, but it is dwarfed by the amount of noise that must be filtered (conversation, argument, trolls, antiquated answers, duplicate answers, troubleshooting steps, experimental solutions etc).

that's the beauty of the internet - it's like real life, you have to use critical thinking :-)
while the sheer volume can be overwhelming, i suspect the ratio of good to bad info is roughly the same