brundlefly

Undertow
You only need two points to fully define a circle. (The centre and any point on the diameter). Adding more points does not in anyway define the circle better. The same thing goes for sampling.

 
Hmmm... sounds familiar:
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/fb.ashx?m=1865385
 

http://forum.cakewalk.com...19&mpage=4#1071805

Great minds think alike!

EDIT: PS: From that thread, this was the animation I linked to demonstrate a circle being a sine drawn out over time: http://www.rkm.com.au/ANI...imation-sine-wave.html It still works great. :-)

UnderTow

Are we there Yet !!

UnderTow

Loptec

UnderTow

Loptec


Anledningen till att jag kanske inte uttryckte mig helt korrekt i mitt första meddelande är kanske att engelska inte är mitt förstaspråk. Om jag hade skrivit det på svenska hade jag nog kunnat uttrycka mig på ett mer korrekt sätt. Jag tycker ändå att min metafor gav en ganska tydlig bild av vad jag menade. Nu förväntar jag mig ett välskrivet och genomtänkt svar av dig, Undertow, på svenska.

Det är inte min avsikt att konfrontera, men hittar du alla dessa detaljer viktiga. Din analogi är felaktig eftersom Sverige i engelska som han. Analogin stämmer inte sig själv. Inte bara de ord du använder.

UnderTow

Sorry.. Google translate is crap when it comes to grammer, my friend.. :)

Not so crap as to lose the meaning. :-) I am sure you understood what I wrote. I did chose to feed google with Dutch because I am guessing the Dutch grammar is closer to Swedish than English but clearly not close enough!

UnderTow

This will be my last msg here, since I’ve got a life.
Here’s what you wrote in Swedish:

“It is not my intention to confront, but find you all these details important. Your analogy is incorrect since Sweden in English as he. The analogy isn’t correct it self. Not just the word you use.”

If this really is what you wanted to say.. Well.. Good for you then.. :)

EDIT: I also want to thank the audience! I hope the popcorn tasted good! And last but not least a big thanks to all the nice people that understood what I meant and backed me up :) :P

Fin

this thread is entertaing at least.

 
mudgel

jyeager11

mudgel

No. What i'm saying is that once you uncheck that box and Don't share drivers with other programs you will be able to play something in Sonar while at the same time play something completely different in another program; though why you'd want to do that I don't know.

While that makes absolutely no sense to me (logic dictates that the whole point of having a "Share Driver With" option is to allow you to "Share Driver With" when it's checked, not unchecked) -- the entire argument is moot because whether checked or not, I can't get Sonar X1b to let me play anything else as long as it's running. It doesn't even need to be playing anything, or even have the window focus. As long as it's simply PRESENT, nothing else will play. Not WMP, not IE, not FF, nothing.

Alternatively, if another application is already playing a sound (such as FF playing a YouTube video, for instance) and THEN I load Sonar X1b, then I'm told by Sonar that the drivers are unavailable and am offered the option to disable or use them anyway. As you might imagine, using them anyway produces no sound from Sonar X1b.

But if I'm on YouTube and the video is stopped, and then I load Sonar X1b, then Sonar hijacks the driver for as long as it's loaded. The YouTube video will not produce sound, and Sonar X1b will. Until I shut down Sonar.

Conclusion :
The "Share Driver With" option in Sonar X1b preferences has absolutely ZERO effect on my Echo Gina 3G. Whichever application is playing sound first is the one hijacking the driver. In the case of Sonar X1b, it doesn't even need to be playing the sound first to hijack the audio driver - it just needs to have been launched while no other applications were emitting any sound.

Any of this make sense to anyone else?

Using ASIO.

Sorry you find what I said is illogical. I don't want to argue with you. Nevertheless it is a fact not my opinion.. Nothing I can do about that. You have come to an erroneous conclusion as there are other factors at play here besides the Share Drivers option
 
 
The Sharing drivers option is included for that very reason ie. Whichever program has focus gets the audio device. that makes sense as it stops 2 programs from simulataneously playing different audio streams through the sound device.
 
As I said there is also something else going on causing your issues.
 
If you're using ASIO for SONAR it explains the matter. Windows and media player are not using the same drivers. Windows doesn't work with ASIO drivers. So there's another reason. Widows will be grabbing the MME or Windows sound Mapper(WDM/KS or WASPI driver for whatever programs are running in Windows but if SONAR is set to ASIO then there'll be a conflict which you are experienceing.
 
It's just not possible to address a bit of hardware with 2 different driver models. Every bit of software has to al least be using the same driver to have a chance.
 
Usually what we do is to use onboard sound device for Windows sounds and any associated audio programs and leave SONAR to use the Pro/Semi Pro device exclusively.
 
if you really want all these things to be able to play simultaneously then you'll have to use the same driver for all the programs and as Wiondows doesn't use ASIO drivers you'll have to choose WDM for SONAR and Windows, then you'll be able to uncheck Share Drivers and notice the difference and away you go.
 
that's the way it is - You have your answer.

mudgel - I'm sorry but some of what you say here is incorrect.  I currently have Soanr X1 open and Windows Media Player open both at the same time.  Sonar is using ASIO drivers for the MOTU.  In my MOTU panel I have "use wavert drivers for windows" checked.
 
both WMP and Sonar will play at the same time.  it's cacophony, but they both play at the same time.  There are 2 reasons I can think of why windows can't use the soundcard at the same time that sonar is open.  1! is that the drivers aren't written (for the Gina in jyeager11's case) so that both driver modes can be accessed at the same time.  that would be the manufacturer of the drivers to change that.
 
2) I have noticed that if the sonar project I have open has a sample rate of anything other than 44.1, then WMP will not play or Sonar will not play one or the other.  it depends on which one I opened first.  the first one gets the drivers the other does not if the sample rates are mismatched.

24/48.

Loptec

Here’s what you wrote in Swedish:

“It is not my intention to confront, but find you all these details important. Your analogy is incorrect since Sweden in English as he. The analogy isn’t correct it self. Not just the word you use.”

If this really is what you wanted to say.. Well.. Good for you then.. :)

Heh. That's rather disappointing of Google translate...

UnderTow

How does bit depth (dynamic range) and sample rate (frequency range) in the digital domain compare to the analog domain? I've been reading that professional analog tape has a frequency range of 10Hz ~ 30kHz(+) so to be able to emulate analog (which is what we're all striving for isn't it?), wouldn't you need to be recording in the digital domain at at least 88.2/24?

Here's some good reading on Analog Vs. Digital and 96kHz. <- This information is leached from another page that is linked at the bottom. This page has an interesting analog to digital reference chart at the bottom that's not on the page the original information came from.

BTW ... it references 'resolution' several times.

SvenArne: Comparisons to images/video are confusing at best. They do not help anyone better understand how digital audio works.

jyeager11: Only to people who have no inclination of how images/video work. To those of us that do, Loptec's metaphor was spot-on, and would help many newbies coming in here with more knowledge of image than audio.

I just wanted to repeat these quotes for the benefit of any actual newbies who might be trying to follow along. The former paragraph is correct. The latter is absolutely bogus and a great disservice to struggling noobs.

How does bit depth (dynamic range) and sample rate (frequency range) in the digital domain compare to the analog domain? I've been reading that professional analog tape has a frequency range of 10Hz ~ 30kHz(+) so to be able to emulate analog (which is what we're all striving for isn't it?), wouldn't you need to be recording in the digital domain at at least 88.2/24?

Where this logic goes off track is in the presumption that recording inaudible frequencies is actually beneficial.

They are all going to be filtered out at some point, whether it's during MP3 encoding, SRC to 44.1 for CDs, or simply due to the limitations of your playback system. And even if you do manage to turn 30KHz content into acoustical energy by playing 88.2KHz files through speakers equipped with ultrasonic transducers, you still won't be able to physically hear it!

There is just one thing that higher sample rates can accomplish: they relax the need for anti-aliasing measures within the signal chain. But there are other ways to do that which are far more efficient, such as oversampling within plugins that are prone to aliasing (e.g. limiters).