Sample rates

[Mr. Torture]

I have a 10 year old computer, purchased new from PC Audio labs. Computer has always worked great, but lately I have looking at recording in higher sample rates, such as 96K.

The old sled just cant take it, even with everything optimized on the computer. Pops, clicks etc...

My question is: Do sample rates matter that much? If I record at 48K versus 96K will it make that big of a difference?

 

Thanks!

[Jack Stoner]

Probably not enough to warrant a new PC.

 

[bats brew]

IF YOU USE a lot of plugins,

96 might make enough difference.

 

otherwise,

48k is enough for 99% of the world.

 

96 is typically used for high end archiving, mastering, or  things other than audio.

 

[Wookiee]

@Mr. Torture what is your intended final medium? If its streaming services and possibly a CD, then 44.1kHz is more than adequat. 

Personally I would suggest you use CbB upsampling function. 

[Alan Tubbs]

Sample rates are overrated.  Lavry   stated that the best rate was somewhere around 60k years ago - I don’t know if that is still valid.  Bit rate is more important, but even there many plugs already upsample within your daw.  And some converter units seem to work better at specific sample rates.

I record 44.1 at 24 bits.  No sound quality problems.  Most of the samples I use or drop are at 44.1 and 16 bits.  I knew a national artist and back in the 90S he would record his rhythms into a 12 bit akai and take that to the neve studio with a 2 inch tape.  There  are  more important facets of sound (not to mention music) than raw sample rate.

but ten years?  You deserve a new computer.

[Mr. Torture]

On 11/22/2021 at 9:17 AM, Alan Tubbs said:

You deserve a new computer.

Haha, I do for sure. Even at 24bit 48K Cakewalk will lock up on me during playback, even with buffers set to over 1,000

[Sheens]

On 11/26/2021 at 6:12 PM, Mr. Torture said:

Haha, I do for sure. Even at 24bit 48K Cakewalk will lock up on me during playback, even with buffers set to over 1,000

Mr Torture,  I have a 10 year old budget Medion desktop that runs perfect on high sample rates, even at the lowest buffer size.

Maybe it's not the computer itself, or just 1 component that's causing the prob. 

For a start I would disable '64 bit engine'  and check settings in Sonar, fe.  try cache reading en/disable, etc. 

Also you could dowload a free latencymon  software tool, that might show you what the problem is.

 

[Mr. Torture]

49 minutes ago, Sheens said:

Mr Torture,  I have a 10 year old budget Medion desktop that runs perfect on high sample rates, even at the lowest buffer size.

Maybe it's not the computer itself, or just 1 component that's causing the prob. 

For a start I would disable '64 bit engine'  and check settings in Sonar, fe.  try cache reading en/disable, etc. 

Also you could dowload a free latencymon  software tool, that might show you what the problem is.

 

Thanks, do you know of any guides I could follow to diagnose the issue I am having? You gave me a couple things to check, I appreciate that!

[Sheens]

dont have a guide or list to diagnose, but I would first check settings on 'my computer'  sound devices, and then check the settings in Cakewalk. 

if your CPU meter in Cakwalk  is showing high load, that could be a point to start checking.

You could find a lot of info through Google,  sorry I don't have time to guide you through.  

good luck

 

[Sheens]

Just now, Sheens said:

dont have a guide or list to diagnose, but I would first check settings on 'my computer'  sound devices, and then check the settings in Cakewalk. and  set sound device.

if your CPU meter in Cakwalk  is showing high load, that could be a point to start checking.

You could find a lot of info through Google,  sorry I don't have time to guide you through.  

good luck

 

 

[Eddie]

Have a look at the free "Glitch Free" ebook. It will likely have some good advice for you.

[Jeremy Oakes]

I would up the i/o buffers and run latency monitor to see what that throws up. 2 good places to start.

J

[John Vere]

You don’t mention what audio interfaces you’re using. ASIO drivers do make a difference and not all are the same and not all play nice on all systems. You should never have to go above 256 for simple projects. 
But There’s a zillion things can be wrong and as said Latency Monitor is a good place to start. Ignore the generic warning it always tosses at you. I think it must be a default. And it never applied to my computers. 
They  also have another app called WhySoSlow. It also helped me figure some stuff out. 
 

Here’s my list of things to watch. 

1. Use nothing but SSD drives for OS and Project files and don’t go past 60% capacity 

2. don’t start adding effects if you’re still recording tracks. Wait until mixing to go crazy 

3. Open Task manager and see what’s going on.

4.Kill stupid apps that need to die! 

5. Pay attention to certain plug ins that might zap your system. 

6. Don’t expect outdated drivers and audio interfaces to perform properly on a updated Windows system. 

7. You can never have too much Memory 

 

Edited December 5, 2021 by John Vere

[John Vere]

Boy is this sub forum ever a nether land. 

[Byron Dickens]

It must not have been very important.

[John Vere]

On 1/13/2022 at 7:55 PM, bdickens said:

It must not have been very important.

Not just that. There’s very little activity here as compared to the Computer sub forum on the old Cakewalk forum. I guess W10 made life too easy. We even had a couple of top shelf DAW builders participating back then. 

[mettelus]

On 11/27/2021 at 1:45 PM, Mr. Torture said:

Thanks, do you know of any guides I could follow to diagnose the issue I am having? You gave me a couple things to check, I appreciate that!

A quick start to see if it is a CPU-hungry plugin is to hit E (global FX bypass) in CbB and see if things suddenly run smoothly. If they do, you can start disabling plugins, with ones intended for mastering (one instance) being used on tracks (several instances) being a common culprit. Some instruments are CPU-hungry as well, which can be mitigated by bouncing (rendering) to a new track and archiving the original track. Playing back "audio only" is significantly easier on the computer than with truckloads of FX in play. Unfortunately, there is no defined list of what to look for, but watching CPU load as you get into mixing will give you a good indication in your workflow.

[Shane_B.]

On 1/15/2022 at 10:30 AM, John Vere said:

Not just that. There’s very little activity here as compared to the Computer sub forum on the old Cakewalk forum. I guess W10 made life too easy. We even had a couple of top shelf DAW builders participating back then. 

Yeah. I can't even get them to write me back now.