Ableton Forum

there are too many variables involved, no one can give you a definitive answer to that. also trade-offs always are highly subjective.

You have to try it out and decide for yourself

What I'm thinking is: if there's any kind of (inferior) 'sample rate conversion' happening when exporting at a different samplerate than the Live set, this must mean the plug-ins, summing, etc. are really *not* working at the chosen export samplerate, but in fact the one in the Live set; only then ...

looking forward to the new warp mode! Though time streching wraps around the core concept of live, it also was quite "mediocre" quality-wise up until now.

Just let me get something straight: when the manual (p.436 or thereabouts) warns against doing this (exporting at a higher samplerate than the Live set), why exactly is this? are you referring to chapter 26.3.2 by chance? got the german version of the handbook, so pages might be different. Anyways,...

generally speaking: yes, you could do this if all the used plugins support this sample rate (nowadays nearly all do).


/edit:

... and all plugins would run @ 96 kHz when rendering at this sample rate.

"sample rate" is a big topic and there are lot of related issues. But to answer your question re "render at higher samplerate": The basic problem is that some plugins change their sound (drastically some might argue) when used at different sample rates. If you mix your track at 4...

i can also reproduce this here. seems like this issue is tied to "global quantize". if its set to "None", the clips always cancel perfectly. the best is to write to ableton support directly and point them to this thread. i can not imagine a scenario where this might be an issue, ...

clips cancel perfectly here. which version of live are you using? try to type in the "seq. BPM" value in the sample info manually. i found that sometimes live automatically puts in a value slighty different from the displayed one, like 120.00001, which then is displayed as 120. This obviou...

also have a 8600gt graphics card and Live performed very badly at low latency settings. this solved it (at least for me): Reduce the "hardware acceleration". http://www.deskshare.com/Resources/articles/dmc_turnoffhardwareacceleration.aspx I had to reduce it by one point (cursor and bitmap ...

After a bit of experimenting I worked out that the problem was being caused by a duplicate plug-in in the chain (i.e. an EQ plug-in I was using on one of the drum tracks and also on the send). It has an oversampling mode on it, so that might be what did it, even though it wasn't enabled. As long as...

Ok, the obvious first: check if "latency compensation" is turned on in the options menu. Which version of Live are you using? There are some things to consider when doing parallel compression: 1. If you send the output of send channels back to a normal audio track, they will not be compens...

i don't think it is a problem to run this set if you prepare it carefully. the major bottleneck in my experience with big live sets is the disk access time of the medium you stream your files from. read through this thread for some more information regarding this issue: http://www.ableton.com/forum/...

levimoniz: for me, it's not about what is more work, but what gives better results. Copy/pasting a utility plugin in every channel before mixing a song should take a comparable amount of time to setting all faders to -12 dB (half a minute or so :) In the end only the results count: but better workfl...

i'm also mixing at the these levels. Though one might consider putting a utility plugin in every channel set to -12 db instead of pulling all channel faders down to -12 db. The resolution of the fader movements is a bit higher @ unity gain especially when lowering the volume (due to the scaling of t...

very good concept! I'll signup at once,

thanks!