Downsampling Software

Discussion in 'Tracking / Mixing / Editing' started by mikezfx, Jun 4, 2003.

  1. mikezfx

    mikezfx Guest

    I use SONAR to record at 48kHz and 24 bits.

    after i mix down i need to export the wav to cool edit to downsmaple to 44.1.

    is there a better program for doing this? does wavelab do this?

  2. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    It really doesn't matter what program you use to be honest. They all do the same basic thing which is mathematically breaking down the samples...

    All programs do this.

    Opus :D
  3. falkon2

    falkon2 Well-Known Member

    Not all programs handle resampling the same way. You could be introducing quite a bit of treble noise if the program simply draws straight lines between the samples and calculates the values of each sample in the new sampling rate based on these lines. (1st order filtering)

    You'll want a program that does nth-order filtering reliably. I'm pretty sure Cakewalk doesn't introduce much more noise than necessary, but Wavelab is a better bet, in any case.

    A good read:

    Edit: My mistake. SONAR only allows you to set the sampling rate before starting a project... there isn't any converter in the program itself.
  4. laptoppop

    laptoppop Guest

    I've seen a few folks compare wavelab head to head with Cool Edit 2.x. So far, Cool Edit has come out slightly ahead - but both are good.

    Ozone from has a great algorithm for dithering from 24-bit down to 16-bit, if that is also something you might need. Its also a killer tool for final multiband processing/compression/limiting/mastering. They have a free PDF about dithering on their site that's worth the read.

  5. mikezfx

    mikezfx Guest

    wow, cool edit comes out ahead?? wouldnt have expected that.

    got a look at wavelab last nite and it quite a robust tool.
  6. laptoppop

    laptoppop Guest

    Don't get me wrong - Wavelab is a good solid tool. CEP gets high marks for the quality of its conversion, and for the way it lets *you* make lots of tradeoffs between time spent in the conversion and quality of output.

    For example with dithering - you have 5 different options as to the method used, and 11 different options in terms of noise shaping.

    Bottom line - both are solid programs and will give you good results. I personally feel Sonar combined with CEP, Ozone and UAD-1 provides a killer platform for making quality music.

  7. falkon2

    falkon2 Well-Known Member

    Another SONAR user! I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't read it myself. :D
  8. Erik Nygaard

    Erik Nygaard Guest

    Why do you record at 48kHz (soundcard limitations?)
    If possible you would be better off recording at 44.1/24. Resampling 48 -> 44.1 would probably introduce more artifacts and offset the benefits of using 24 bit.

  9. mikezfx

    mikezfx Guest

    erik -

    i do 48k becuase of CPU limitations. my card is a Delta 1010 so it does do 24/96.

    thank you for the advice, from now on ill go 44.1/24 bits. too bad all my projets are currently in 48k :-/

    im looking to get a new computer so I can go up to 96kHz.

  10. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    Actually if you're going to do higher sampling rates your better off at 88.2 as the mathematical breakdown is half of what it needs to get to when going down to 44.1.

    At 96khz you'll get artifacts such as when you go from 48 to 44.1 as Erik pointed out.

    Remember the "true" main benefit of higher sampling rates is for when you bounce down to 44.1 in the long run.

    Having worked for Apogee for quite some time now and learning all about converter technology and all that fun stuff you realize just how unimportant sample rates are...

    Opus :D
  11. Blutone

    Blutone Guest

    So 24/88.2 is better than 24/96 in regards to bouncing down to 44.1?
  12. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    That's what I said!

    88.2 is better for bouncing down to 44.1

    Opus :D

Share This Page