• SONAR
  • Freezing tracks doesn't do what I think it is supposed to? (p.3)
2013/12/15 14:11:13
grizwalter
My record bit depth is, in fact, set to 24 bit. My render, in fact, is set to 32 bit. My sampling rate I change up and down, always aiming for 96K, but settling for 48K when something runs the risk of being too tough on my system. (I've seen no noticeable difference in performance in this regard either way, however.)
 
PS: Kinda curious on this issue, btw. 24 bit, 48K I'm told is really where one wants to be, eventually down to 16-bit, 44.1K for CD. Degredation can occur, I understand, but wondering realistically why anyone would need to go much higher than 24/24 frankly, 48K - 60ishK?
2013/12/15 14:16:09
Bristol_Jonesey
I agree with Bitflipper (again!)
 
I've run a 75 track project in XP32 with only 4Gb of RAM and this played back effortlessly, with at least a hundred plugins, multiple unbounced V-Vocal clips and about a dozen or so soft synths.
 
I think your problem is elsewhere.
2013/12/15 14:22:16
Splat
I mainly do 24/44.1 as I'm not doing movies.
2013/12/15 15:05:48
drewfx1
grizwalter
PS: Kinda curious on this issue, btw. 24 bit, 48K I'm told is really where one wants to be, eventually down to 16-bit, 44.1K for CD. Degredation can occur, I understand, but wondering realistically why anyone would need to go much higher than 24/24 frankly, 48K - 60ishK?



It's a little bit complicated and there is some controversy here.
 
As a playback medium:
 
Theoretically, in the modern world 44.1 is good enough. And with modern sample rate conversion (SRC) - and Sonar's is very good - converting between sample rates is transparent to the listener. In the real world, the higher frequencies available at higher sampling rates are unlikely to be audible or desirable - unless you are producing very high level, high frequency pure sine waves for young people playing things back through a system that can cleanly reproduce such frequencies. Double blind tests where sample rate changes down to 44.1kHz were introduced to the audio have resulted in people not being able to tell the difference.
 
HOWEVER, it has been stated that at least some digital to analog converters perform differently at different sample rates. This is most likely due to the specific design of the DAC rather than the sample rate alone. And note that you only have control over your own DAC, not other listeners.
 
 
For processing inside the DAW:
 
Some types of processing benefit from being done at higher sampling rates. In many cases, particularly for more modern plugins, the process is oversampled internally where desirable or necessary.
 
You can also achieve lower latency with a DAW using a higher sampling rate.
 
_________________________________________________________________
 
I would say that in the real world, the questions regarding degradation come down to not whether something is theoretically better, but whether the differences are audible.
2013/12/15 15:42:52
grizwalter
Hey drewfx1, thanks for that thorough response. Good stuff to know. I was quite surprised that you noted the higher sampling rate reducing latency. I would not have guessed that part.
 
Conversion, which you discuss a bit, is only relevant in the actual recording/mixing process I assume? This is not something anyone contends with in the end-user system since by that point it is all standardized, or am I not thinking of something? Obviously in sharing of files this could be an issue, but I wouldn't think it relevant outside of the actual recording environment, and there I suppose the practical application would be, choose with, and stick with, your rate?
 
Thanks again. Very informative sir.
 
Griz
2013/12/15 16:14:00
drewfx1
If you run Sonar at 48 or 96kHz (or whatever) and want 44.1 kHz output then you need to do a SRC. That's all. 
 
Especially many years ago, SRC quality was a much bigger issue than it is today (and until recently - version 10? - Sound Forge's SRC still wasn't very good, but it is today). This leads some people to still be wary of doing SRC's, but Sonar's SRC is excellent and really is not something you need to worry about.
2013/12/15 16:59:49
grizwalter
Got it! Thanks again sir!
 
Oh, and also, based on the statement that higher sampling rate can improve latency, I suppose I should ask, should I try upping it further? I think Sonar and my setup allow for well over 130K, maybe 160ishK something-or-other. I stopped looking after 96K. lol
 
2013/12/15 18:25:22
soens
SuperG
It's in the right-click Freeze options dialog as Track FX, if it's not checked, FX are not baked in and are still live. You can tell if you've freezed with FX baked; plugins are greyed-out.




Cool! Did not know! FYI, he means right-click the FREEZE button, go to OPTIONS and check/uncheck the TRACK FX box.
2013/12/18 08:03:53
rontarrant
grizwalter
how much RAM I have, even if it was an issue, wouldn't explain why the hang-ups would only show up AFTER freezing the tracks, which is where my confusion rests.

Sorry, I must have misread that the first time around. I've got nothing.
 
One idea: did you retry all this with X3d yet? Has it made a difference?
© 2026 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account