SOLVED - upsampling prochannel - easy way

I know this is an oldie, couldn't find any answers in the search.
 
I would like to know if there is a way (these days) to upsample the prochannel modules without "hacking" the registry.
 
P.S. wouldn't dynamic processors benefit from upsampleing?

using the 2x button in the control bar is upsampling fx and processors.

You will find in the following thread of tunekicker a lot of good infos about  upsampling in Sonar :
http://forum.cakewalk.com...e-so-far-m3386790.aspx
and the Sonar documentation about :
http://www.cakewalk.com/D...mp;help=Mixing.26.html

I don't think so. The purpose of the 2x button is to affect those plug-ins already configured for oversampling not to setup plug-ins for oversampling. Cakewalk does need to create a tool for managing the settings though. That tool could have a way to create oversampling entries for plug-ins including PC modules. That or at least add something to the PC header to create the oversampling entry. I could add a feature to the tool I wrote to add PC modules but I doubt there is much demand for the original tool. The registry lookup is not that difficult and it is a one-time thing. From there all the action is in Aud.ini and it is not that difficult to maintain.

I don't think this is the kind of feature one would constantly tinker with but I could be wrong. Accessing the feature could use some improvement. I have written a tool to make updating individual entries easier. The SONAR Plug-in Upsample Editor is available on the SONAR Resources and Utilities page

The 2x toggle only affects plug-ins setup in Aud.ini for upsampling. It has no affect on any plug-in, PC or otherwise if they lack an entry in the [PluginUpsampler] section in Aud.ini. By default no plug-in is setup for upsampling. For all but the PC modules, the basic upsample setting may be created by using the Windows menu in the upper-left of the plug-ins UI. Refer to http://www.cakewalk.com/Documentation?product=SONAR&language=3&help=Mixing.26.html for more information.

Im not certain if this is still active, if so can anyone confirm, while Im uncertain in my understanding up-sampling,  I had read somewhere, and/or assumed, recording at 96 kHz, or more would resolve any issues or need for up-sampling?   

Anderton
 
As with so many aspects of pro audio, the final, definitive, 100% correct answer is...it depends. Check out the linked video.

Maybe I should have asked, I record at 96k, is there a still a need for up-sampling? (Sorry Im not sure which video was intended to watch?) 

Recording at 96 kHz will solve most issues that upsampling is intended to solve. However as the video shows, there's a significant audible difference between recording at 88.1 kHz and 176.2 kHz with a very specific type of waveform that's generated in the box. Then again, how often will you use a sound source that is affected in this way (answer: not often!), and how many people would even know that it was supposed to sound different (I doubt any).
 
Just to bring things back on course, all that matters is the emotional impact of the music on the listener. A great song is a great song at 44.1 or 96 or 384 kHz, and while a particular virtual synth might sound slightly different at these different sample rates, I don't think it would interfere with anyone's listening pleasure. 
 
That said, though...you pretty much can't go wrong with higher sample rates, if your system is up to the task. If not, well, there's always upsampling.

JohnEgan
 Would it be correct to assume at 96k, it would be of no real benefit (or risk) to have the global 2x enabled?

 
Upsampling should be applied selectively because it's not always needed and does use resources. Simply enable it on playback if you have doubts. If you hear an improvement, leave it enabled. If not, don't.
 
FWIW "improvement" is subjective. Foldover distortion can give a thicker sound that some people prefer compared to an extremely clean sound.