Gearslutz.com
All Advertisers

Go Back   Gearslutz.com > The Forums > Mastering forum

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Upsampling" Psyko/Acoustics Mastering forum 3 18th April 2006 05:27 AM
Mastering - does use of signal crush maximizers make mastering compression - redunda Jules Mastering forum 15 30th August 2005 04:55 PM
Upsampling ttauri So much gear, so little time! 1 14th March 2005 02:49 AM
Upsampling 44.1 to 48 for video? bdunard So much gear, so little time! 7 20th February 2005 06:15 PM
Pro Tools: Upsampling From 48k to 96k Quality Loss? Perspectrum Music computers 1 25th February 2004 11:22 AM

View Poll Results: Do you upsample for mastering.
yes 5 21.74%
no 12 52.17%
sometimes 6 26.09%
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 10th April 2006, 06:50 AM   #1
pingu
Lives for gear
 
pingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 665
Upsampling for mastering

How often do you guys do this?

Is it standard procedure for you?

And if it is, you obviously feel the gains are greater than the down sampling losses?

Id like to know the whys and why nots, of what you guys are doing.
pingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2006, 07:00 AM   #2
jayfrigo
Moderator
 
jayfrigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by pingu
How often do you guys do this?

Is it standard procedure for you?

And if it is, you obviously feel the gains are greater than the down sampling losses?

Id like to know the whys and why nots, of what you guys are doing.

You can sometimes spread out processing artifacts over the wider spectrum and then when using quality SRC coming back to 44.1 the filtering will get rid of the stuff above Nyquist. That's one theoretical advantage, especially for the nonlinear stuff.
__________________
Jay Frigoletto
Mastersuite
www.promastering.com
www.studiometronome.com
jayfrigo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2006, 07:32 AM   #3
pingu
Lives for gear
 
pingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayfrigo
You can sometimes spread out processing artifacts over the wider spectrum and then when using quality SRC coming back to 44.1 the filtering will get rid of the stuff above Nyquist. That's one theoretical advantage, especially for the nonlinear stuff.


Where do the processing artifacts come from mostly?
pingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2006, 02:49 PM   #4
Bob Boyd
Gear maniac
 
Bob Boyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 260
I guess I upsample indirectly. The Weiss EQ1-LP and Weiss DS1-MkII internally upsample before processing and then downsample before it's output (when receiving 44.1k or 48k material). I owned these devices before this was available and it made a noticable difference.

This is becoming more and can be found in products like the GML Hi-Res EQ, and current products from PSP like MasterQ, Neon, and MasterComp - all great products in their own right.
__________________
Bob Boyd
Ambient Digital
http://myspace.com/ambientdigital


That's why they're called "Business socks".
Bob Boyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2006, 02:52 PM   #5
Bob Boyd
Gear maniac
 
Bob Boyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 260
delete please - duplicate
__________________
Bob Boyd
Ambient Digital
http://myspace.com/ambientdigital


That's why they're called "Business socks".
Bob Boyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2006, 03:11 AM   #6
dcollins
Gear addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hollywood CA
Posts: 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by pingu
Where do the processing artifacts come from mostly?
Clipping, limiting, etc. The hardware L2 does seem to work better at 2fs, for whatever reason.

DC
__________________
Dave Collins Mastering
www.collinsaudio.com
+1 323 467 5570
dcollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2006, 05:24 AM   #7
vaesion
Lives for gear
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: tampa
Posts: 525
Send a message via AIM to vaesion
IM experimenting with this now. Someone please correct me if IM doing it wrong. I cant afford to record at 96 k and im use to recording at 44k. For the time being IM experimenting with a song I already recorded at 24 44. Out of nuendo I bounce at 32 but float 44 k. Then in wavelab I upsample to 96k. Once 96 k I apply my eq/compression and final limiting and then set the output for 16 44.

IM wondering if I should down sample after I dither or before?

Also what would be the better src to use with pc?

Is wavelab ok?
vaesion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2006, 06:12 AM   #8
pingu
Lives for gear
 
pingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins
Clipping, limiting, etc. The hardware L2 does seem to work better at 2fs, for whatever reason.

DC


Cool thanks Dee Cee
pingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2006, 06:13 AM   #9
pingu
Lives for gear
 
pingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 665
I like plugins that give you the option to upsample like
voxengo.
pingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2006, 12:06 PM   #10
void
Gear nut
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 75
Even though Im thinking of approaching it with a mixing perspective...

What do people here use/rercommend as the best way of upsampling/downsampling?
void is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0