1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

Resolution Question

Discussion in 'Recording' started by Guitarfreak, Mar 28, 2009.

  1. Guitarfreak

    Guitarfreak Well-Known Member

    Continued from another post, I was wondering if resolution, (44.1, 96 and etc.) played a role in tracking and mixing, or if it is strictly a bouncing thing.
  2. BobRogers

    BobRogers Well-Known Member

    I think (not completely sure about this) that mixing is the only real reason to go higher resolution. In other words, if you were going to record direct to two-track and market at 44.1 would there be any real reason to record to a higher resolutions? (Other than the hope that in the future music will be implanted directly in our brains, bypassing the cochlea so we'd better be ready with as high a resolution as we can get.)

    Mixing at 88.2 or higher and dithering to 44.1 is more accurate than mixing at 44.1 just think of the round off error.
  3. Guitarfreak

    Guitarfreak Well-Known Member

    I just tried tracking in 96k and the resulting track sounds choppy and unorganized. It's not distortion and/or clipping, it sounds like instead of being ABCD it's ACBD, if that makes sense. Why would this happen?

    I am taking a DI of my guitar to my Firebox which is 24 bit/96k compatible and going straight to Logic Express with no plugs.
  4. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    Are you recording to your system drive? This is cause by your hard drive or your system not being able to keep up.
  5. MadMax

    MadMax Well-Known Member

    Sounds like you just found one of the limits of your gear setup, and one of the real nasties of digital audio... and that is that 96k produces double the data of 48k.

    Doubling the data rate, requires 4x the processing rate to read, write and process the stream.

    It also takes approximately 6x the I/O rate of 48k... which is probably where your drive is falling down. This is why you should put your data on a 2nd drive. It will offload it from passing data through the same I/O port as your system drive. And thus causing a huge bottleneck.

    Also, your input and output buffer settings generally have to change between tracking and mixing much more dramatically for higher sample rates.
  6. Guitarfreak

    Guitarfreak Well-Known Member

    How so? I have my buffer set to 512, should I have it lower? And will this cause any quality loss? Forgive me for a stupid question but I have tried to research this online and in the logic manual. How do you save your projects to an external drive? I have wanted to do this for a while but couldn't really figure it out.
  7. MadMax

    MadMax Well-Known Member

    Generally, you want larger input buffers for tracking w/smaller output buffers for playback, then reverse that for mix.

    I don't use Logic, but I can't imagine that it would be any harder than navigation to the external drive.
  8. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    Generally there is only on buffer setting with most DAWs. Some allow you to go deeper but generally you don't want to mess with it too much for fear of forgetting to change the settings when you mix. Adjust the I/O buffer to as small as you can without causing hiccups(buffer underruns). I'm thinking that any lower than 512 at 96k will just accentuate the problem.

    As far as writing to an external drive:

    When you start a new project, the first thing Logic should ask you to do is name the project and decide where it will save the project. This is where you decide what drive to use. Also, you want to ensure that Logic writes all it's temporary files/takes/edits to the external drive. Go to the manual and search the index for that info.
  9. Cucco

    Cucco Distinguished Member

    One additional note -
    Using a buffer of 512 or 1024 - if there's a buffer drop out, then you lose that many sample. On the other hand, if you're losing lower buffers and can get away with it, say 128, then a buffer drop out means only 128 samples are lost. When 1024 are lost, everyone's grandma can hear it. When 128 are lost, it's possible to be unnoticed.

    I just recorded 8 tracks at 24 bit 88.2 kHz last night for 2 hours at 128 samples buffer. I had 1 drop out while I was dorking around with some of the computer's video settings - not during any important part.

    Just some thoughts -
  10. Guitarfreak

    Guitarfreak Well-Known Member

    Thanks for all the help! I believe you were right in assuming that it was CPU stress. I re-recorded the same track later with the same settings, except that I closed all my other running applications and it translated fine. I just find it funny how the CPU meter in the DAW never showed stress.
  11. TheJackAttack

    TheJackAttack Distinguished Member

    Every program that is open is trying to reserve resources for itself regardless whether you are actively viewing it or not.

    If you are recording, especially at higher sampling rates, then you need to streamline the machine. I regularly track 16 channels at 88.2 without problems. I don't try to run anything else simultaneously.
  12. Guitarfreak

    Guitarfreak Well-Known Member

    What kind of machine do you have? I am using a white iMac, 2GHz, 2 GB Ram. It's not ideal for recording, but then again it could be worse. Frankly I'm not sure if mine would be capable of tracking more than 8 tracks at a time at anything higher than 48k.
  13. TheJackAttack

    TheJackAttack Distinguished Member

    I'm not a Mac guy. I don't have anything against them I just don't use them. As such I won't be able to help you tweak your Mac. The last Mac I used (2002) didn't have 2 gig of ram or a dual core processor so I wouldn't rule out being able to use 16 channels at 88.2k or 96k.
  14. Codemonkey

    Codemonkey Well-Known Member

    Guitarfreak, I heard the red macs go faster.
    Maybe if you paint red stripes on the side of your white one?

Share This Page