Author Topic: Sample Rate Conversion Comparisons (Read 6490 times)

mhibbs · « **on:** February 10, 2007, 08:06:48 PM »

Ran across this...thought it was pretty interesting. They compared the transparency of several editors...Wavelab, Peak, Pro Tools, etc. Wavelab doesn't fair so well it appears...which probably explains why it's so damn fast.

http://www.bias-inc.com/products/peakPro5/resampling/peakResamplingWhitePaper.pdf

ShawnF · « **Reply #1 on:** February 12, 2007, 12:19:24 AM »

Pretty interesting stuff--I've been pretty happy with resampling in Audition, but haven't done any direct comparisons. Glad it fared so well in this test, at least. Wished they had included Samplitude, though.

Charlie Miller · « **Reply #2 on:** February 12, 2007, 02:31:26 AM »

Quote from: ShawnF on February 12, 2007, 12:19:24 AM

Pretty interesting stuff--I've been pretty happy with resampling in Audition, but haven't done any direct comparisons. Glad it fared so well in this test, at least. Wished they had included Samplitude, though.

Samplitude kicks ass!!

Brian Skalinder · « **Reply #3 on:** February 12, 2007, 10:27:02 AM »

Quote from: ShawnF on February 12, 2007, 12:19:24 AM

Wished they had included Samplitude, though.

Yeah, me, too. I poked around a bit to see if I could do my own analysis, but I'm not positive I have the proper spectrogram analysis capabilities. Need to dig a bit more. At any rate, I may yet do a listening comp (like my dither comp), if not a spectrographic analysis comp. We'll see...

wbrisette · « **Reply #4 on:** February 12, 2007, 11:11:56 AM »

http://src.infinitewave.ca/

This is another comparison chart.

Wayne

Edit: actually, as I see from the whitepaper, this is the source they used...

it-goes-to-eleven · « **Reply #5 on:** February 12, 2007, 11:36:00 AM »

Guess I need to dump the wave 192 resampler...

BayTaynt3d · « **Reply #6 on:** February 12, 2007, 12:58:11 PM »

Quote from: Freelunch on February 12, 2007, 11:36:00 AM

Guess I need to dump the wave 192 resampler...

Not so sure, I mean the purple colors are weighing in at under -100db aren't they? For the kind of recording we do, this seems more than fine, but I'm not one to opine as I record 24/44.1 a lot to avoid the hassle in the first place, heh.

ShawnF · « **Reply #7 on:** February 13, 2007, 11:00:24 PM »

Quote from: BayTaynt3d on February 12, 2007, 12:58:11 PM

Not so sure, I mean the purple colors are weighing in at under -100db aren't they? For the kind of recording we do, this seems more than fine, but I'm not one to opine as I record 24/44.1 a lot to avoid the hassle in the first place, heh.

Ditto, unless I'm also doing video (48, of course) or doing something that's unamplified that I think might actually justify 88.2 or 96. Most of my resampling is from 48 to 44.1 when I need an audio-only version of something intended for use with video. Just got another 4 gig CF card, though, so maybe I'll try running at the higher rates more often.

Would love to see how resampling in Samplitude compares with Audition . . .

F.O.Bean · « **Reply #8 on:** February 13, 2007, 11:13:37 PM »

i do lots of 24/44.1k stuff, but imo wl 5.01b does a more than fine job for going from 48 or 96k for my PA recording needs, and a bonus is its alot quicker than alot of other programs

gratefulphish · « **Reply #9 on:** February 14, 2007, 12:14:52 AM »

I went and downloaded the r8brain freeware. Seems to be a very simple interface, and based upon the second link, it performed as flawlessly as the best of the programs.

ellaguru · « **Reply #10 on:** February 15, 2007, 05:08:56 PM »

r8brain does look sweet...just grabbed it & i'll try it out here in a few..thanks!

cr

F.O.Bean · « **Reply #11 on:** February 15, 2007, 06:42:13 PM »

is r8tbrian a plugin or program?

gratefulphish · « **Reply #12 on:** February 15, 2007, 07:27:12 PM »

A program, that does nothing but rate conversions.

F.O.Bean · « **Reply #13 on:** February 15, 2007, 09:58:57 PM »

+T gratefulphish, i gave it a d/l and checked it out, but for recording 24-bit like i do, its another step for me and i honestly will prolly never use it, so i erased it. but for especially 16-bit folk doing 16/48 or folks who dont mind that extra step in 24-bit land, looks like a decent freeware program

just staying in WL 5.0 is much easier than doing wavelab>r8brain>wavelab so........

todd e · « **Reply #14 on:** February 16, 2007, 01:07:56 PM »

bean - since when is easier = better? just pointing out your logic, i understand your reality POV.

RE: SRC - is there not a better resampling plugin for wavelab, that way you could simply batch process files, once tracked out, and achieve a better end result.

gratefulphish · « **Reply #15 on:** February 16, 2007, 01:39:19 PM »

Quote from: Bean on February 15, 2007, 09:58:57 PM

+T gratefulphish, i gave it a d/l and checked it out, but for recording 24-bit like i do, its another step for me and i honestly will prolly never use it, so i erased it. but for especially 16-bit folk doing 16/48 or folks who dont mind that extra step in 24-bit land, looks like a decent freeware program

just staying in WL 5.0 is much easier than doing wavelab>r8brain>wavelab so........

Bean, After looking at the various teat results from the second link, I decided it was worth that quick extra step. I would have normally used SF, which looked okay in the tests, but if you believe what the tests showed, WL leaves a lot to be desired in that area.

wbrisette · « **Reply #16 on:** February 16, 2007, 02:58:17 PM »

Quote from: todd e on February 16, 2007, 01:07:56 PM

RE: SRC - is there not a better resampling plugin for wavelab, that way you could simply batch process files, once tracked out, and achieve a better end result.

Yes. Look at:
http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/ozone/

This is one of the best (and the tests also confirm it). Price is a bit steep, but then I think most of the plug-ins are overpriced.

Wayne

Brian Skalinder · « **Reply #17 on:** February 16, 2007, 03:25:14 PM »

Quote from: wbrisette on February 16, 2007, 02:58:17 PM

Yes. Look at:
http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/ozone/

This is one of the best (and the tests also confirm it). Price is a bit steep, but then I think most of the plug-ins are overpriced.

FWIW, in addition to top-notch SRC, the Ozone plug-in also offers the best dithering I've heard via MegaBitMax (MBIT+). (See dither comparison and listen for yourself.)

todd e · « **Reply #18 on:** February 16, 2007, 03:33:04 PM »

werd up - this is exactly what i was lookign for....

thanks brian and wayne

cleantone · « **Reply #19 on:** February 16, 2007, 03:47:14 PM »

any good Mac solutions? I spent 12 hours in DP4 (at "best") converting 96K > 44.1K for a 90 minute stereo file. That wasn't very fun.

todd e · « **Reply #20 on:** February 16, 2007, 04:11:01 PM »

so i started digging deeper:

and stumbled across this comment/post on gearslutz...

Here is a test with the different sample rate conversion that many DAW's have. What we hear on the left side of the graph is in our hearing range. http://src.infinitewave.ca/ The one in Cubase/Nuendo 2. is not very good. Wavelab though is one program that is a lot better. Just having all the meters can tell you things that you could not hear in your home studio without proper monitors, high end converters and sound proofing on walls, ceiling and corners.

http://gearslutz.com/board/archive/index.php/t-58252.html

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://src.infinitewave.ca/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

this link is the best way to compare, visually
unreal the difference in wavelab 5 internal, vs wavelab 5 192 resampler......

wbrisette · « **Reply #21 on:** February 16, 2007, 07:12:04 PM »

Quote from: cleantone on February 16, 2007, 03:47:14 PM

any good Mac solutions? I spent 12 hours in DP4 (at "best") converting 96K > 44.1K for a 90 minute stereo file. That wasn't very fun.

See my post about Audiofile Engineering's Wave Editor. It includes the MBIT+ as part of the package.

[edit: Actually it was in the Dither thread... but check out Wave Editor]

Wayne

cleantone · « **Reply #22 on:** February 16, 2007, 08:15:30 PM »

Thanks Wayne. Too bad it is not a freeware. It is extremely rare that I need to convert sample rate and I have Peak and DP that both do it. I also have a few ways of going about this in the analog realm. Oh well. I can get that freeware one for PC's and use a PC if and when. I would love to hear about good free mac soft's for this purpose if anyone knows of one. I know how that sounds but I don't want to spend a hundo to downsample a file once a year or something.

wbrisette · « **Reply #23 on:** February 19, 2007, 06:47:37 AM »

Quote from: cleantone on February 16, 2007, 08:15:30 PM

Thanks Wayne. Too bad it is not a freeware. It is extremely rare that I need to convert sample rate and I have Peak and DP that both do it.

So do it in Peak after you bounce your mixdown. Peak isn't lacking in that regard.

Wayne

todd e · « **Reply #24 on:** February 19, 2007, 10:12:48 AM »

Quote from: wbrisette on February 16, 2007, 02:58:17 PM

Quote from: todd e on February 16, 2007, 01:07:56 PM
RE: SRC - is there not a better resampling plugin for wavelab, that way you could simply batch process files, once tracked out, and achieve a better end result.

Yes. Look at:
http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/ozone/

This is one of the best (and the tests also confirm it). Price is a bit steep, but then I think most of the plug-ins are overpriced.

Wayne

do you have ozone3? just curious as to where the resampling function actual resides?

wbrisette · « **Reply #25 on:** February 19, 2007, 10:20:03 AM »

Quote from: todd e on February 19, 2007, 10:12:48 AM

do you have ozone3? just curious as to where the resampling function actual resides?

Audiofile Engineering actually licensed the code and integrated it into their product, so it works a bit differently in Wave Editor. However it resampling and dithering are all part of the ozone3 plugin.

Wayne