waiting for polar and was wondering.....

[nutekk]

yea of course man
i usually end up dithering some sounds in the mix
even down to 8 bit! sounds raunchy agood in contrast to some
clean pad or something.

hey the powercore can do 32/96 from what i understand.
maybe this is a viable option for those wanting to use
the totally unuseful higher sampling rates.

[tk]

Originally Posted by nutekk

hey the powercore can do 32/96 from what i understand.
maybe this is a viable option for those wanting to use
the totally unuseful higher sampling rates.

The powercore plugins CAN do 96kHz but they do not do 32 bit resolution.

warning: heavy tech babble and personal meaning ahead

Actually, nothing that is using VST does work in 32 bits.

VST works with audio data coded in 32 bit floats. The standard describes the audio signal as in a range from 1.0f to -1.0f.

The (single precision) "float" datatype is a 32bit construct with a 1bit sign, 8 bit exponent and a 23 bit mantissa ( or fraction).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_fl...point_standard

Because the exponent is always 1 (-1.0 to 1.0) you have left 24 bits to express your "level" (23 bit fraction/1bit sign). Therefore you do not have actually any advantage, in terms of "bit depth", in float DSPs (like i.e. the shark DSP) vs. 24bit DSPs (like the motorola ones).

I have to admit that this is not totally true since a there are values where the fraction is the same and the exponent shifts, but the precision gain in this is less than audible at all and also not guaranteed for all possible values within the range [-1,1].

Of course this is source of a lot of philosophical discussions, meanings and even flamewars, which I don't want either to bring up nor take part of.

tk

-this post is of course not an official statement of access music gmbh-

[jasedee]

Why all the fighting????

Use whatever makes you happy! THE END!!!!!!!!!

[nutekk]

yo jasede i dont know who is fighting?

so the virus|powercore can do then 24/96?
think im more concerned with sampling rate and not bit depth.
24/32 in most hosts as you say doesnt really matter.

[Timo]

Hmm, bit-depth is usually considered more pertinent than higher sample-rates, in no small respects due to the significantly greater dynamic range (and lower noise-floor).

What sort of dynamic range does the TI give when using all six streams via USB? I think 16-bits give -78dBs per channel, maximum? (six at the same time would be about -62dB, unless there's some digital compensation or mute/gate jiggery pokery going on?)

[nutekk]

i was saying the difference between 24 and 32 didnt concern
me as much as being able to do 96k

[DIGITAL SCREAMS]

Originally Posted by nutekk

that is rubish. You have met with and discussed with 99% of the buying public please!

Have you?

Originally Posted by nutekk

as stated before it doesnt matter what the target media may be mp3,cd, or vinyl it still makes a difference if you mix @ a higher rate

Unless you have a ?4000 medium to high-end hifi you wont really benefit from ultra high quality recordings.

Originally Posted by nutekk

this "attitude" is negative and imo shouldnt be coming from a company such as access who i thought were dedicated towards sound

Of course Access is dedicated towards the sound. You like the sound of their synths dont you? They must be doing something right

Originally Posted by nutekk

it seems though they havent been paying attention...and goofed the "ti" aspect of the synth

Since they are the only manufacturer to have attempted to implement this....i dont think its fair to say they've goofed the 'TI' aspect. In real terms they've achieved it.....initially in a slightly limited way. Hence, I'll be waiting for the version which does implement the feature fully. No one put a gun to your head to buy the TI....you knew what your buying....hell you've had 9 months to think it through.

Originally Posted by nutekk

im not saying it isnt a great sounding synth. im am saying that "TI" shouldnt have been the name

What would you have called it then?

PS - im not getting at you....just trying to ascertain how you see things...

DS

[DIGITAL SCREAMS]

Originally Posted by nutekk

this is such a crappy attitude.
im shocked. 8O

LOL.....but what Ben is saying is actually the way it is. Your not going to hear any audiable difference (whilst listening to a 192kbps mp3) from a track originally recorded on a quality 16/44 soundcard to that of some 24/96 card. The dynamic range of mp3 just wont allow for it. Secondly, your only going to hear a difference when playing a CD if you have a medium to hi-end hifi (circa ?3000+). I know this...as im into hifi and can 'hear' the difference. YOur average jo bloggs sits at home with their ?300 mini system....sorry to burst the bubble....but all you get from those kinda mass produced hifi's is sonic distortion.

You live in a world where you want pristine sound quality....thats great...I feel the same way....but as Ben hinted...and from what i know....most people arent living in the same sonic world as you or I. Sound card manufacturers love to bombard you with specs....but as a final thought...a high quality 16.44 soundcard pisses on a cheaper 24/96 card. Im not too familiar with the pulsar card...but it sounds like it sits in the sub ?1000 budget category.

Plz dont take offence to my comments....your entitled to yours as I am.

DS

[nutekk]

ok..

have i spoke with 99percent of the buying public?
no and i dont claim to have!

higher bit/rate mixing and recording benifits the producer hugely.
thus making the finished product better for the end user.
i know i attain a better control with less work @ higher rates.
dont act like noone uses higher rates because it is simply not true.

yes there synths are a staple.however for someone that does all there demoing and stuff to "say the public doesnt care about quality
because they listen to mp3" doesnt sound like a good attitude to me.
i despise mp3 and never listen to them...i must be the only one
so because people listen to mp3 it doesnt matter that the "ti audio function" isnt able to support a standard that is supported by even crappy vsti...and sound blaster live cards!

please! ever heard of "waldorf microwave pc".
i own one and it came out in 1999.
it is the guts of an XT mounted in a 5 1/4 drive bay that interfaces with
the computer and you control it with a plugin interface
a full 10 voices-
hardware keyboard quality latency
full hardware compatibility.
no cpu cycle stealing
I love the unit...which is why i wanted to go for the same type of thing
for the virus.

again i would not call it a TI
because its intergration is quite limited.
if you are buying it for just the synth then im sure you will be happy
but if you are buying it for the "intergration"
dont plan on working on anything but 16/44 intergrated
other than that the intergration is a usb cable instead of a midi one.

jesus
my problems arent off the wall.
it doesnt say anywhere in the documentation that your host has to be set
to 16/44.
Everyone doesnt work @ 16/44
again take a look at the audio cards that have come out in the last 2 three
even 4 years. all higher bit rate compatible....
this is no little sect of recording producers.it is the present and future.

if access continues with the "ti" line which i think they should
version 2
will correct these core flaws in the total intergration aspect.

[nutekk]

and i dont want pristine sound quality.

the higher bit rates make my job as a producer easyer.
plain and simple.

common im not the only one mixing @ 24/96 PLEEEASE!