Topic: Sample Rate Conversion Comparisons

[mhibbs]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[BayTaynt3d]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

cr

[F.O.Bean]

is r8tbrian a plugin or program?

[gratefulphish]

A program, that does nothing but rate conversions.

[F.O.Bean]

+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]

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.