Members Anderton Posted November 4, 2015 Members Share Posted November 4, 2015 In case you've been wondering what I've been up to this past week, here's the link to the AES 139th Convention show report. FWIW there were record crowds...17K registered, close to that attended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dendy Jarrett Posted November 4, 2015 Members Share Posted November 4, 2015 And a great job you did ... I must say. Your opening is so spot on! D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 It looks like it was a really successful AES show - maybe one of the best in recent memory? Anyway, I loved the show report. Lots of cool goodies to gawk at! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Geoff Grace Posted November 5, 2015 Members Share Posted November 5, 2015 Yes, great show report, Craig! I'd like to know more about this: FWIW I also did a presentation for TASCAM at the Gibson New York showroom with audio demo files that showed under the right conditions, recording at 96 kHz can make for audibly more accurate sound, even when sample-rate-converted back to 44.1 kHz. Yes, people were surprised but the difference was obvious. What are the "right conditions?" Best, Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mark L Posted November 5, 2015 Members Share Posted November 5, 2015 Very comprehensive report. Nice work, Craig Great pics! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted November 8, 2015 Author Members Share Posted November 8, 2015 Yes, great show report, Craig! I'd like to know more about this: What are the "right conditions?" Best, Geoff I'm going to be doing an article about this in detail for Sound on Sound. But basically, if you work inside the box and use plug-ins that aren't oversampled and create high frequency harmonics or transients, recording at 96 kHz can make a big difference. But I'm finding out more all the time. I used SONAR's upsample-on-render option with an amp sim plug-in that already does oversampling (at least in theory), and the reverb imaging "wandered" at 44.1 but doesn't at 96 kHz. My assumption is that only the amp itself is oversampled, the reverb isn't. However it could be something else... It's a pretty complex topic, hence the reason for doing a full article. Suffice it to say that after SONAR introduced upsample-on-render, I re-rendered the mixes for my upcoming album (which now has a tentative name: neo-) and because of all the sims and in the box synths, there was a noticeable difference in terms of clarity. Then again if you're recording a singer/songwriter playing guitar, it won't make any difference because no harmonics are going to hit the 44.1 kHz clock range, they will have all been filtered out by the interface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Geoff Grace Posted November 8, 2015 Members Share Posted November 8, 2015 Yes, great show report, Craig! I'd like to know more about this: What are the "right conditions?" Best, Geoff FWIW I also did a presentation for TASCAM at the Gibson New York showroom with audio demo files that showed under the right conditions, recording at 96 kHz can make for audibly more accurate sound, even when sample-rate-converted back to 44.1 kHz. Yes, people were surprised but the difference was obvious. I'm going to be doing an article about this in detail for Sound on Sound. But basically, if you work inside the box and use plug-ins that aren't oversampled and create high frequency harmonics or transients, recording at 96 kHz can make a big difference. But I'm finding out more all the time. I used SONAR's upsample-on-render option with an amp sim plug-in that already does oversampling (at least in theory), and the reverb imaging "wandered" at 44.1 but doesn't at 96 kHz. My assumption is that only the amp itself is oversampled, the reverb isn't. However it could be something else... It's a pretty complex topic, hence the reason for doing a full article. Suffice it to say that after SONAR introduced upsample-on-render, I re-rendered the mixes for my upcoming album (which now has a tentative name: neo-) and because of all the sims and in the box synths, there was a noticeable difference in terms of clarity. Then again if you're recording a singer/songwriter playing guitar, it won't make any difference because no harmonics are going to hit the 44.1 kHz clock range, they will have all been filtered out by the interface. Thanks for getting back to me on this, Craig. Interesting stuff! As a subscriber to Sound on Sound, I'm very much looking forward to your article. I'm also looking forward to your release, neo-! Do you have ETAs for the article and your album? Best, Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted November 8, 2015 Author Members Share Posted November 8, 2015 Do you have ETAs for the article and your album? Given how far ahead magazines work, if I get the article done in the next week or two it will probably show up in the first quarter of 2016. As to the album, I'll be posting the "release candidate" on YouTube soon for scrutiny by the "SSS Production Squad." As with the individual songs, it will be an unlisted link. After I implement any recommended changes - although I don't think there will be many, as they've been incorporated into the individual songs - then there will be a more formal release. Given that it's an album, I'm thinking of posting three versions on my YouTube channel: One long file without any video, except for song titles during the duration of the songs One long file, but with the videos I did previously The individual songs as "singles" I'm also going to delete the previous versions, as the latest ones have quite a few improvements in terms of sound and mix quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Geoff Grace Posted November 9, 2015 Members Share Posted November 9, 2015 That sounds great, Craig. I'm looking forward to hearing the cuts and reading the article! Best, Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.