thornton
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 222
- Joined: 2014/09/26 11:23:12
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/02 17:00:44
(permalink)
can we get an example of this in a video or audio so I can hear the difference. is there a setting other than what is on the plugin
|
scook
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 24146
- Joined: 2005/07/27 13:43:57
- Location: TX
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/02 17:05:06
(permalink)
|
slartabartfast
Max Output Level: -22.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5289
- Joined: 2005/10/30 01:38:34
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/02 18:27:55
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Notecrusher 2015/07/02 19:06:04
Anderton
The examples are NOT upsampled audio files, but rendered virtual instruments. In other words, the first example was a virtual instrument sitting in a 44.1 kHz project. It was never recorded at 44.1 kHz, it was rendered at 44.1 kHz. The second example has the same instrument, same track, same MIDI data feeding it, etc., and was also never recorded at 44.1 kHz. However, it was rendered at 96 kHz via upsampling, then downsampled to 44.1 kHz.
What you're seeing in the graph is what's so cool about the process; what is in the audio range is reproduced accurately when downsampled.
Thank you for the clarification, perhaps I was confused by the limited description of the process in your post here, and added to the confusion with my "upsampled/downsampled" abbreviation. The issue with the difference in frequency distribution is not an indication of distortion introduced by the higher sample rate resampled to a lower rate per se, and I would not have expected that it was. Nor is the difference in the two clear evidence that the, to me, more pleasing sound of the second example is due to the elimination of foldover distortion. The argument I put forward in my post here that such a removal of the aliased frequencies would not be manifested as additional power at new frequencies is the same regardless. The black box virtual instrument must have generated the new frequencies when sitting in a 96 K project that it did not generate in a 44.1 K project. That those new features were preserved in the downsampling is not amazing, although it is cool, since they represent features that were created by the virtual instrument under the altered conditons of the higher sample rate. The preservation of those features would be true of any rendered audio signal properly downsampled. Once they were generated you could upsample and downsample the rendered audio back and forth and they would be minimally altered. With a virtual instrument, the issue of fidelity or distortion is problematic. The instrument in your example generates distinctly different tones in projects at different sample rates. Is the "true" tone the one produced in the lower or higher sample rate environment? Is the lower sample project output the one intended by the designer, or was the instrument unable for some reason to generate the intended features at the lower rate? As Noel suggests here the source of the difference is in the DSP algorithms hidden in the instrument, and are not predictable without knowing what is happening inside the black box. Why the designer would have chosen algorithms that produce such different renderings is a mystery. The issue in this case is esthetic, and in that sense this local oversampling feature can be looked at as an effect, like highpass filtering followed by a chorus or flanger or the like. if you like the output of this particular instrument better with the upsampling on, then by all means turn it on. With other plugins like a limiter or compressor that are generally intended to be "transparent," affecting only a limited aspect of the audio input to the plugin, such as volume, this kind of behavior would be objectionable to most users. Some readers of this thread may be under the impression that upsampling prior to engaging the plugin will result in some kind of general "repair" of faulty or deficient plugins, and that the mechanism of that repair is that the higher sample rate eliminates aliasing introduced by the plugin. In specific cases it may, but it can not be taken as a general rule. Nor can the fact that the output sounds "different" with the upsampling engaged be equated with it sounding better or more accurately processing the input without additional demonstration. On the other hand, if there is no difference in the output at different sample rates, the proposition that the plugin has been properly designed to produce the same output at both sample rates is more secure.
|
Notecrusher
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 579
- Joined: 2004/02/17 00:32:14
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/02 19:02:17
(permalink)
slartabartfast
Anderton
The examples are NOT upsampled audio files, but rendered virtual instruments. In other words, the first example was a virtual instrument sitting in a 44.1 kHz project. It was never recorded at 44.1 kHz, it was rendered at 44.1 kHz. The second example has the same instrument, same track, same MIDI data feeding it, etc., and was also never recorded at 44.1 kHz. However, it was rendered at 96 kHz via upsampling, then downsampled to 44.1 kHz.
What you're seeing in the graph is what's so cool about the process; what is in the audio range is reproduced accurately when downsampled.
Thank you for the clarification, perhaps I was confused by the limited description of the process in your post here, and added to the confusion with my "upsampled/downsampled" abbreviation. The issue with the difference in frequency distribution is not an indication of distortion introduced by the higher sample rate resampled to a lower rate per se, and I would not have expected that it was. Nor is the difference in the two clear evidence that the, to me, more pleasing sound of the second example is due to the elimination of foldover distortion. The argument I put forward in my post here that such a removal of the aliased frequencies would not be manifested as additional power at new frequencies is the same regardless. The black box virtual instrument must have generated the new frequencies when sitting in a 96 K project that it did not generate in a 44.1 K project. That those new features were preserved in the downsampling is not amazing, although it is cool, since they represent features that were created by the virtual instrument under the altered conditons of the higher sample rate. The preservation of those features would be true of any rendered audio signal properly downsampled. Once they were generated you could upsample and downsample the rendered audio back and forth and they would be minimally altered.
With a virtual instrument, the issue of fidelity or distortion is problematic. The instrument in your example generates distinctly different tones in projects at different sample rates. Is the "true" tone the one produced in the lower or higher sample rate environment? Is the lower sample project output the one intended by the designer, or was the instrument unable for some reason to generate the intended features at the lower rate? As Noel suggests here the source of the difference is in the DSP algorithms hidden in the instrument, and are not predictable without knowing what is happening inside the black box. Why the designer would have chosen algorithms that produce such different renderings is a mystery. The issue in this case is esthetic, and in that sense this local oversampling feature can be looked at as an effect, like highpass filtering followed by a chorus or flanger or the like. if you like the output of this particular instrument better with the upsampling on, then by all means turn it on. With other plugins like a limiter or compressor that are generally intended to be "transparent," affecting only a limited aspect of the audio input to the plugin, such as volume, this kind of behavior would be objectionable to most users.
Some readers of this thread may be under the impression that upsampling prior to engaging the plugin will result in some kind of general "repair" of faulty or deficient plugins, and that the mechanism of that repair is that the higher sample rate eliminates aliasing introduced by the plugin. In specific cases it may, but it can not be taken as a general rule. Nor can the fact that the output sounds "different" with the upsampling engaged be equated with it sounding better or more accurately processing the input without additional demonstration. On the other hand, if there is no difference in the output at different sample rates, the proposition that the plugin has been properly designed to produce the same output at both sample rates is more secure.
Thank you for delineating my point in an extraordinarily clear fashion.
|
thornton
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 222
- Joined: 2014/09/26 11:23:12
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/02 19:27:21
(permalink)
is up sampling the same as oversampling and do you have to record at 96k or 44.1 for this to work just trying to understand further thanks for Y'all help
|
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
- Total Posts : 6475
- Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
- Location: Boston, MA, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/02 20:09:46
(permalink)
slartabartfast
Thank you for the clarification, perhaps I was confused by the limited description of the process in your post here, and added to the confusion with my "upsampled/downsampled" abbreviation. The issue with the difference in frequency distribution is not an indication of distortion introduced by the higher sample rate resampled to a lower rate per se, and I would not have expected that it was. ...
The argument I put forward in my post here that such a removal of the aliased frequencies would not be manifested as additional power at new frequencies is the same regardless. T
I agree with what you are saying. We answered most of these questions and explained it quite clearly in the e-zine. I've copied the relevant section below. Regarding how you could get a power boost its hard to say without guessing With foldover distortion its possible that the folded back frequencies could be additive with other preexisting low/mids or it could even diminish the gain if they happened to be phase inverted. Another possibility with instruments is they may actually be using different samples at different sample rates to avoid internal resampling. Or it could be just DSP bugs :) The bottom line is you should use judgement in deciding whether you like it or not - distortion may not always be a bad thing as most guitar players would tell you, although foldover distortion is not typically something you would want. LIMITATIONS OF UPSAMPLING Please note that only some plug-ins, generally older ones, benefit from upsampling and only if significant high frequencies are present. If no harmonics exist that reach into the range of the clock, there will be no foldover distortion, hence no need for upsampling. There can be a significant improvement in sound quality with some plug-ins, no improvement with others, and a few may actually sound worse. So, upsampling is enabled on a per-plug-in basis—in other words, enabling upsampling for one plug-in enables it for all instances of that one plug-in, in any project. Because this rendering process is CPU-intensive, do not enable upsampling for a particular plug-in unless you can hear an actual difference. Note that SONAR’s high-end sample rate conversion requires considerable CPU power, so this process is available only when doing a fast (non-real-time) bounce. Also, the maximum upsample rate is 384 kHz, so upsampling is not available for projects that run above 192 kHz; and at present upsampling cannot be applied to plug-ins in surround buses, or to bit-bridged plug-ins or region effects. Finally, note that some plug-ins may not support operating at a higher sample rate. In this case, SONAR displays an error message toast notification, and performs the plug-in bounce at the original project sample rate. It’s also important to remember that the sound designer probably built a sound based on what was heard. If you now process at high sample rates, the sound may be brighter because the high frequencies are no longer being folded back, and there could be less perceived low end because the foldover distortion is no longer there. Whether that sounds “better” or not is subjective.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/02 21:15:05
(permalink)
slartabartfast
Some readers of this thread may be under the impression that upsampling prior to engaging the plugin will result in some kind of general "repair" of faulty or deficient plugins, and that the mechanism of that repair is that the higher sample rate eliminates aliasing introduced by the plugin. In specific cases it may, but it can not be taken as a general rule. Nor can the fact that the output sounds "different" with the upsampling engaged be equated with it sounding better or more accurately processing the input without additional demonstration.
This is pretty much explained in the eZine. I would recommend reading it if people want to know more. The bottom line is a) it can make a difference, and b) it needs to be tried on a case-by-case basis.
|
mudgel
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12010
- Joined: 2004/08/13 00:56:05
- Location: Linton Victoria (Near Ballarat)
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/03 07:58:08
(permalink)
Anderton
slartabartfast
Some readers of this thread may be under the impression that upsampling prior to engaging the plugin will result in some kind of general "repair" of faulty or deficient plugins, and that the mechanism of that repair is that the higher sample rate eliminates aliasing introduced by the plugin. In specific cases it may, but it can not be taken as a general rule. Nor can the fact that the output sounds "different" with the upsampling engaged be equated with it sounding better or more accurately processing the input without additional demonstration.
This is pretty much explained in the eZine. I would recommend reading it to people who want to know more.
The bottom line is a) it can make a difference, and b) it needs to be tried on a case-by-case basis.
Feel free to come and read it to me any time. Though a little notice before you visit would be nice. Thanks.
Mike V. (MUDGEL) STUDIO: Win 10 Pro x64, SPlat & CbB x64, PC: ASUS Z370-A, INTEL i7 8700k, 32GIG DDR4 2400, OC 4.7Ghz. Storage: 7 TB SATA III, 750GiG SSD & Samsung 500 Gig 960 EVO NVMe M.2. Monitors: Adam A7X, JBL 10” Sub. Audio I/O & DSP Server: DIGIGRID IOS & IOX. Screen: Raven MTi + 43" HD 4K TV Monitor. Keyboard Controller: Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol S88.
|
Doktor Avalanche 
Max Output Level: -32.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4294
- Joined: 2015/03/26 18:02:02
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/03 08:01:58
(permalink)
#88  
post edited by Doktor Avalanche - 2015/07/03 08:08:21
Sonar Platinum(64 bit),Win 8.1(64 bit),Saffire Pro 40(Firewire),Mix Control = 3.6,Firewire=VIA,Dell Studio XPS 8100(Intel Core i7 CPU 2.93 Ghz/16 Gb),2 x 1TB SSD (Samsung EVO 850),GeForce GTX 460,Yamaha DGX-505 keyboard,Roland A-300PRO,Roland SPD-30 V2,FD-8,Triggera Krigg,Shure SM7B,Yamaha HS5. Rap Pro,Maschine Studio+Komplete 9 Ultimate+Kontrol Z1,Addictive Keys,Waves Silver,Izotope Nectar elements,Overloud Bundle,Geist,Acronis True Image 2015.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/03 11:50:08
(permalink)
mudgel
Anderton
This is pretty much explained in the eZine. I would recommend reading it to people who want to know more.
Feel free to come and read it to me any time. Though a little notice before you visit would be nice. Thanks.
Ha! Yes, I just noticed the ambiguous phrasing and changed it. Although I suppose we could have a group Skype meeting and someone could read it to everyone else 
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: The Foxboro Plug-In Upsampling Thread
2015/07/03 19:22:14
(permalink)
Well I thought let's see if upsampling makes one of my songs sound better.
I have found on my win7 32 bit machine that if there are any UAD-1 plugins in the file, enabling upsampling on any vst whether or not it is associated with a track that contains a UAD plug or not, will result in an out of storage space error upon export. This condition will persist until Sonar is closed and restarted. Removing the 3 UAD plugs (2 instances of LA-2A on tracks and one Pultec on the 2 bus). If I open the file and remove those UAD plugs then I can upsample and export ok.
My asio buffers were 128 and I jacked them to 1024 but that didn't help.
|
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
- Total Posts : 6475
- Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
- Location: Boston, MA, USA
- Status: offline
Re: The Foxboro Plug-In Upsampling Thread
2015/07/04 00:03:35
(permalink)
UAD plugins don't like different buffer sizes so it definitely wont work with them. i.e. they have a limitation that *all* UAD plugins have exactly the same buffer sizes. Of course if you want to upsample one of them this won't work. So don't do that :) Edit: Wait you said you aren't even upsampling the UAD plugins? Thats weird that they would complain since their buffer sizes aren't being changed. One thing is possible however - if the UAD plugins in the same bin downstream from an upsampled plugin its possible that it might get a a buffer thats smaller than the configured buffer size. Check if moving the UAD plug to a different bus solves it.
post edited by Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk] - 2015/07/04 00:13:31
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: The Foxboro Plug-In Upsampling Thread
2015/07/04 00:12:29
(permalink)
You're up late.
Tomorrow I will do some testing with a plain file and a few plug ins to get a better picture for ya.
|
mudgel
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12010
- Joined: 2004/08/13 00:56:05
- Location: Linton Victoria (Near Ballarat)
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/04 04:27:55
(permalink)
Anderton
mudgel
Anderton
This is pretty much explained in the eZine. I would recommend reading it to people who want to know more.
Feel free to come and read it to me any time. Though a little notice before you visit would be nice. Thanks.
Ha! Yes, I just noticed the ambiguous phrasing and changed it. Although I suppose we could have a group Skype meeting and someone could read it to everyone else
I'm glad I captured the truth for posterity. Or as they would say in the Coffee House; for posterior.
Mike V. (MUDGEL) STUDIO: Win 10 Pro x64, SPlat & CbB x64, PC: ASUS Z370-A, INTEL i7 8700k, 32GIG DDR4 2400, OC 4.7Ghz. Storage: 7 TB SATA III, 750GiG SSD & Samsung 500 Gig 960 EVO NVMe M.2. Monitors: Adam A7X, JBL 10” Sub. Audio I/O & DSP Server: DIGIGRID IOS & IOX. Screen: Raven MTi + 43" HD 4K TV Monitor. Keyboard Controller: Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol S88.
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/05 00:02:11
(permalink)
Well I spent the better part of the day monkeying around with upsampling.
If I used a small file than none of the problems I had initially with the uad were not there anymore except if I tried to enable upsampling on the uad plug I got a buffer mismatch error.
As for my song with lots of tracks and plugs I was able to upsample most all the vsts just not the uad plugs (or suffer the buffer change error, but all in all upsampling seems like a hit. The mix is less cloudy and much more defined and open sounding compared to the 44.1 k version from before.
|
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
- Total Posts : 6475
- Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
- Location: Boston, MA, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/05 07:44:13
(permalink)
Thanks for the update. I'm curious what happens if you upsample *all* the uad plugins in the project. Or move then to a sep bus that has no other resampled plugs in it.
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/05 08:28:19
(permalink)
I'll try that sometime today.
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/05 09:58:53
(permalink)
Ok as you suspected, enabling upsampling on all the uad plugs works without error. Disabling upsampling on the pultec on the 2 bus while leaving the La2a's upsampled on bass and vox result in the buffer size mismatch error. So I guess testing the uad plugs on their own track would be unnecessary?
post edited by bitman - 2015/07/05 10:05:28
|
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
- Total Posts : 6475
- Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
- Location: Boston, MA, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/05 10:17:10
(permalink)
Yeah UAD plugins require all the active plugins to have the same buffer size. Its a limitation of the UAD hardware.
This is contradictory to upsampling that requires the upsampled plugin to run at a higher buffer size.
Putting *all* the UAD plugins in a single bin and upsampling the first one would also work.
I would also expect that if the UAD plugins were in an independent bin and none of them were upsampled it would work irrespective of other upsampled plugins in the project.
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/05 10:23:21
(permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
I would also expect that if the UAD plugins were in an independent bin and none of them were upsampled it would work irrespective of other upsampled plugins in the project.
And you suspect correctly as that's how it was getting exported last night, most, if not all VSTs upsampled and no uads upsampled.
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/05 17:42:06
(permalink)
New findings: I don't know what it is yet but the song I upsampled that I was so happy with sound correct but one track, the pedal steel is way down in level. (I know, that's probably why it sounds better). I checked the source multitrack and the steel is at the right level so something is going wrong here during upsample export . Maybe I just triggered and purposeful anti-steel condition in the up/down sampler code - I dunno. I'll tell y'all what fixes it.
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/05 18:05:01
(permalink)
Well if I turn off upsampling on the EQ that is in the steel's fx bin the steel level returns to normal after export.
The steel track has other upsampled effects on it that don't seem to be adversely affected by upsampling.
Crazy thing is, That is my goto eq and is placed all though the file on many tracks that don't seems to be affected this way.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/08 02:41:48
(permalink)
Add SI Strings to the list of plug-ins that benefit from oversampling. I rendered a string part on a song tonight, and I could definitely hear the difference in sections where there weren't lower frequencies to mask the distortion. The highs also seemed a bit less dull.
The way I tested this was to group mute buttons on the VI track and rendered track so they worked oppositely (i.e., if I clicked on a mute button to mute, the other unmuted. If I clicked again, the button unmuted and the other muted). After matching levels, I closed my eyes and clicked on one of the mute buttons really fast - so many times I lost track of which mute button was on. Then I continued to click, but slowly. When I could tell that one option definitely sounded better than the other, I opened my eyes to see which track had been muted.
|
stevec
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11546
- Joined: 2003/11/04 15:05:54
- Location: Parkesburg, PA
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/07/08 18:53:36
(permalink)
Same with SI Piano from what I can tell - there is a difference in the high end.
SteveC https://soundcloud.com/steve-cocchi http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=39163 SONAR Platinum x64, Intel Q9300 (2.5Ghz), Asus P5N-D, Win7 x64 SP1, 8GB RAM, 1TB internal + ESATA + USB Backup HDDs, ATI Radeon HD5450 1GB RAM + dual ViewSonic VA2431wm Monitors; Focusrite 18i6 (ASIO); Komplete 9, Melodyne Studio 4, Ozone 7 Advanced, Rapture Pro, GPO5, Valhalla Plate, MJUC comp, MDynamic EQ, lots of other freebie VST plugins, synths and Kontakt libraries
|
miracledee
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 29
- Joined: 2014/12/22 01:14:00
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/08/10 06:49:41
(permalink)
How do I upsample the ProChannel Modules...?
|
scook
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 24146
- Joined: 2005/07/27 13:43:57
- Location: TX
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/08/10 07:43:38
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby miracledee 2015/08/27 08:46:05
From the registry, look up the clsidPlug value in the VST Inventory for the plug-in.
Add a line at the bottom of Aud.ini in the PluginUpsampler section. The format of the entry is
{clsidPlugValue}.EnableFlags=1
to turn on Upsample on Render. To disable either remove the line or set the value to zero.
|
miracledee
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 29
- Joined: 2014/12/22 01:14:00
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/08/10 08:27:16
(permalink)
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/08/10 09:28:31
(permalink)
Please report back if you hear that upsamping makes a difference with particular plug-ins.
|
btsabq
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 146
- Joined: 2003/11/08 13:45:43
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/08/10 12:24:20
(permalink)
I recently tested up-sampling with Addictive Drums 2 and thought that there may have been a positive effect on the sound - mostly in the highs.
Can anyone confirm that AD2 benefits from up-sampling or was this a case of wishful thinking?
* UAD-2, Slate Mix & Master Suite, MJUC, Disto, RC24, Valhalla, etc. * MOTU 828MKII Black Lion Mod * SPlat 64bit * Benchmark DAC-1 * Mackie HR824
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Which Sonar included plugs (current or Legacy) benifit from Upsampling?
2015/08/10 16:45:08
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby btsabq 2015/08/10 17:26:25
btsabq
Can anyone confirm that AD2 benefits from up-sampling or was this a case of wishful thinking?
I heard a difference as well. VERY subtle and only on some cymbals, but it was there. FWIW I've been finishing up my next album (for those who don't know what an "album" is, in the distant past musicians would often put together a collection of songs intended to provide a cohesive listening experience, sort of like an "audio movie" ), which means a lot of mixdowns. Upsampling definitely makes a cumulative difference if a project has several elements that benefit from upsampling. It's subtle, but every little bit of increase transparency helps...sort of like blowing the dust off a painting.
|