Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
Post Reply
phonographiq
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:08 pm

Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Post by phonographiq » Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:13 pm

Maybe someone out there could put my mind at ease here.

I've employed resampling a lot over the years. I typically roll with a default eight channel set with 8 being my resample channel. Though I'm not entirely sure I'm convinced that the resampled audio is exactly the same. After recording the clip, I'll set it's warp mode to repitch for unadulterated audio. I understand that master effects, rack effects, return effects with color the sound and so I'll always put them in bypass before I record. However perhaps it's just my computer music brain that tells me it's not the same when I listen back.

All my channels in my arrange window are at -6dB with a utility to bump it up some if needed and the return is completely dry. This will occasionally drop some volume tweaking my way when I want to move that resampled audio back to the original source channel. That I can live with. I'm just curious if anyone has an under-the-microscope explanation for my paranoia.

Thanks y'all.
Last edited by phonographiq on Mon Jul 09, 2012 5:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
rhythmic surrealism / philadelphia / $$$
http://soundcloud.com/phonographiq

simmerdown
Posts: 3761
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 3:36 pm
Location: Northwest Nowhere

Re: Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Post by simmerdown » Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:25 pm

site looks cool phono...youll drive new visitors away with that underline though...lil fyi

Meef Chaloin
Posts: 2164
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 10:09 pm

Re: Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Post by Meef Chaloin » Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:41 pm

test it with phase, it's an easy way to tell if it is exactly the same or not.

mharris
Posts: 71
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:41 pm

Re: Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Post by mharris » Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:55 pm

When you resample, the new clip is recorded at whatever sample and bit rate you have Live set to. This obviously may be a lower sample and bit rate than the original material.

Also, experiment with the track routing of your resample track. For the input try Master as well as the Resample option. I seem to remember reading about how the resample option disables certain internal routings to prevent an infinite feedback loop so try both of those options and see if you notice a difference.

^^ As above, a good old phase inversion test will allow you to check if there is something there or if you're just imagining it.

invol
Posts: 604
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:47 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Re: Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Post by invol » Sat Jul 07, 2012 5:38 am

For Resampling that needs every bit of detail, record at 32 bit. If you use 24 there is some truncation, since Live's mixer runs at 32 bit.
Just remember to set your prefs back to 24 bit before recording from external source, or you will just be wasting disk space and CPU resources.

_Brian

phonographiq
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:08 pm

Re: Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Post by phonographiq » Mon Jul 09, 2012 5:23 am

Woah, cool. So I only recently switched back to 48000 from 44100. Part of that was set as such from playing shows- lots of CPU being used on my 2gig machine that I try to minimize the damage and avoid unpleasant pops during a set.

I'll give it a go with the master/resampling routing. Never thought of that. Theoretically, this might be what I'm looking for. The phase technique is also something I never really zeroed in on. All of this makes sense. I guess maybe some days it's easy to just get sucked into the M4L/Bomes wormhole and just get lost in the mania of resampling, shit gets too microscope after a while, to the point where things like "do these sound the same?" just makes you lose yr mind.

Thanks yall.
rhythmic surrealism / philadelphia / $$$
http://soundcloud.com/phonographiq

phonographiq
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:08 pm

Re: Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Post by phonographiq » Mon Jul 09, 2012 5:25 am

simmerdown wrote:site looks cool phono...youll drive new visitors away with that underline though...lil fyi
:wink:
rhythmic surrealism / philadelphia / $$$
http://soundcloud.com/phonographiq

ott_face
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 4:06 am

Re: Resampling quality: carbon copy or less?

Post by ott_face » Mon Jul 09, 2012 8:39 am

I'd be interested in hearing your reflections on any further experimentation phonographiq. I've been wondering about this but haven't yet invested any serious time in exploring it.

Post Reply