Pro-tone Posted December 18, 2022 Share Posted December 18, 2022 Hi! I'd like to ask you add 768 kHz support since now it is limited up to 384 kHz. That sample rate required to set it in the project to export audio (with further downsampling till 96kHz) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Nicholls Posted December 18, 2022 Share Posted December 18, 2022 Music for bats? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InstrEd Posted December 18, 2022 Share Posted December 18, 2022 13 minutes ago, Colin Nicholls said: Music for bats? Either that or they want to torture my pets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Stanton Posted December 18, 2022 Share Posted December 18, 2022 too much spare disk space and cpu? ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWillyDS12 Posted December 19, 2022 Share Posted December 19, 2022 4 hours ago, Glenn Stanton said: too much spare disk space and cpu? ? We'll just use Double-Density Disk and Dual Xeon Processors... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starship Krupa Posted December 19, 2022 Share Posted December 19, 2022 Um....yeah, no, not going to be anyone's priority to make the software able to create files in a format that almost nobody can record or play back. I mean....is this a joke? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azslow3 Posted December 19, 2022 Share Posted December 19, 2022 I think that is a wish to use 8x oversampling, just for "safety" or really required by some crazy plug-in to work properly... In the second case it is better re-think and abandon the plug-in in question. It is definitively not written good when requiring such oversampling (and not providing it internally). In the first: that is "too much" in safety, do not forget that all less then a half of sampling frequencies are perfectly reproduced. Unlike 8x AA in graphics, extra high sampling rage does not "improve" anything. 96kHz by itself is already reproducing frequencies more that two times higher then any human (and audio equipment) can perceive. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Tim Posted December 19, 2022 Share Posted December 19, 2022 You know your guitar player plays super fast when.... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Stanton Posted December 19, 2022 Share Posted December 19, 2022 (edited) 4 hours ago, Lord Tim said: You know your guitar player plays super fast when.... and you're using the 12-bit crusher effect on the torn cone edge recording made via a 50 year old SM-57 through the 20 bit 48K ADAT... nothing says love like resampling to 768Khz to get that really crisp leading edge transient that fans go crazy for... listening on the 16-bit 44.1Khz lossy file format audio on the subway ride... Edited December 19, 2022 by Glenn Stanton 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobertWS Posted December 19, 2022 Share Posted December 19, 2022 Something tells me this will be Pro-tone's first and last post. 2 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Tim Posted December 19, 2022 Share Posted December 19, 2022 6 hours ago, Glenn Stanton said: and you're using the 12-bit crusher effect on the torn cone edge recording made via a 50 year old SM-57 through the 20 bit 48K ADAT... nothing says love like resampling to 768Khz to get that really crisp leading edge transient that fans go crazy for... listening on the 16-bit 44.1Khz lossy file format audio on the subway ride... Sure, it might sound like rubbish, but when you can play 768,000 notes per second, people are waiting for the flaming finger stumps rather than the bell-like tones! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSteven Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 (edited) On 12/18/2022 at 8:41 AM, Pro-tone said: Hi! I'd like to ask you add 768 kHz support since now it is limited up to 384 kHz. That sample rate required to set it in the project to export audio (with further downsampling till 96kHz) The question / request might be legit is the asker is a newbie stumbling across the Internet...Finally, music we can buy in 768 khz sampling rates.Can a Dac really play 768 kHz? - Audio Gear Talk - Roon Labs Community but that doesn't mean that the request will be taken seriously as that sample rate is not realistic for any give audio purpose except PR stunts and April Fools jokes. If Pro-tone is interested in why - they need to do a little research on how to set up a DAW and the relationship between sample rate, CPU usage and disk space. Not to mentioned looking up the limitations of human hearing. Peace out - no further comments from me on this thread. Edited December 22, 2022 by TheSteven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthur killen Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 (edited) On 12/18/2022 at 8:41 AM, Pro-tone said: Hi! I'd like to ask you add 768 kHz support since now it is limited up to 384 kHz. That sample rate required to set it in the project to export audio (with further downsampling till 96kHz) I've been using Cakewalk since the 90's, and until 2 years ago, would've had a snarky response for this request. Nyquist theorem, music for bats, etc. Then, I was exposed to audiophile setups and DSD. It was a bit of an ego hit, realizing that those systems were exposing aspects of my recordings that weren't audible with my studio monitors, headphones, and audio interfaces. Stuff like soundstage and imaging, which I always thought was snake oil, turned out to be real. So now, I record in DSD, and downsample to 352 kHz PCM in Cakewalk strictly for volume adjustments (most plugins don't support 352kHz, and will further downsample to 192 or 96), and export back out to DSD. This is another area where I would have previously argued that going to PCM in Cakewalk negated the point of recording in DSD. But then I tried it, and there is a difference. If Cakewalk supported higher than 352 (I use even multiples of DSD sampling rates), then there would be less downsampling required (half as much in my case), and even more of the DSD recording's original depth/soundstage/imaging would be retained throughout the process. Admittedly, this is a niche need, and most people's systems would not reveal any difference. But in my case, this is a valid scenario. Sorry for the rant, but hopefully some of the folks on this thread will understand where some of these unique requests are coming from. The high sampling rate doesn't allow you to hear higher pitch sounds, but it does have an effect on the sounds in the human hearing range, with a proper setup and a revealing system. You'd at least need a good DAC (not a recording interface), speakers made for audiophiles (not studio monitors or big box speakers), and a good amplifier (not a big box receiver) to hear it. But it's there. Edited December 22, 2022 by arthur killen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Dickens Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 Hogwash. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Stanton Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 (edited) and the hyper-twisted platinum coated silver power cord ($15K each), audio wiring ($32K each), optical cable ($14K each), and speaker wires ($2K/ft). power filtration ($47K), faraday cage ($200K depending on room size), and the proper furniture polish to "soften harsh reflections" ($500 per 8oz) @Byron Dickens -- this isn't hogwash for the people who can hear it ? lol -- i should know. i sell a lot of my special blend "acoustic perfection furniture polish -- unscented" ? lol Edited December 22, 2022 by Glenn Stanton 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthur killen Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 Hi Byron, I'm curious which types of audiophile systems and source material you've experimented with, to lead you to that conclusion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthur killen Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 1 minute ago, Glenn Stanton said: and the hyper-twisted platinum coated silver power cord ($15K each), audio wiring ($32K each), optical cable ($14K each), and speaker wires ($2K/ft). power filtration ($47K), faraday cage ($200K depending on room size), and the proper furniture polish to "soften harsh reflections" ($500 per 8oz) @Byron Dickens -- this isn't hogwash for the people who can hear it ? lol Hi Glenn. Audiophile systems don't have to cost thousands. I've definitely never spent that much on gear. Most of my components are less than $500. I'd encourage you to try it, if you haven't yet. I was a skeptic, and used to wonder why people don't just get an interface and some monitors instead. Anyway, the tone here doesn't seem the friendliest, so have a good one folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Stanton Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 @arthur killen the problem with all the audiophile stuff is the room. i've been fortunate to have built some of the finest critical listening rooms as well as experience them. most of those rooms cost literally tens of millions of dollars to create and then a lot of money to operate and keep calibrated as the materials and systems age. so the idea that a few grand of equipment (a studio monitor worthy of 768Khz would be $80K each -- and no audiophile speaker is really going to match that until you hit $200K each). so - does good equipment matter? definitely. does it really matter that your recording process / work of studio, equipment, writers, performers, and distributors boils down to listening to an MP3 file? not really. so if you're making music for audiophiles - awesome. you may have to wait a bit for the plugins etc to catchup though... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Dickens Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 (edited) 55 minutes ago, arthur killen said: Hi Byron, I'm curious which types of audiophile systems and source material you've experimented with, to lead you to that conclusion? The only people in the world more gullible and susceptible to expectation bias than guitar players are "audiophiles." Edited December 22, 2022 by Byron Dickens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Tim Posted December 23, 2022 Share Posted December 23, 2022 If you read through the thread that @TheSteven posted, they went so far as to do null tests and all kinds of stuff and came to the conclusion that it was a massive waste of time, even for the people who had systems that could even play this back at all. Glenn knows what he's talking about here. Like he said, he literally designs rooms where that high end stuff lives. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now