What is max Bit Depth / Sample Rate of ableton?

[Bulemy]

Cakewalk has 64 bit / 384 khz. Would be nice if ableton kept up!
By the way, Ableton - a fully 64 bit engine, or a hybrid of 32 bit?
Is it relevant?
https://www.ableton.com/en/manual/audio-fact-sheet/

[Tone Deft]

found a discussion on Gearslutz.
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/masteri ... ugins.html

Non-linear processes create false HF content regardless of sample rate. Working at low sample rates like 44.1K causes that HF content to get mirrored down into the audible band while higher rates let that "junk" stay above the audible band. When you down-sample at the end of the project, that "junk" is removed without causing the alias distortion you'd get otherwise. Many high quality clippers & limiters use 2, 4 and even 8X oversampling internally. 8fs is important because most DACs are 8fs. That means an 8fs oversampling limiter can take care of inter-sample peaks that will be created in the DAC while non-8fs limiters won't.

Now, I agree that 384K is a bit excessive and prefer to operate at 88.2K or 96K for almost everything. I don't do much processing ITB these days though.

it started as a topic about the VST side of 384kHz but they wanted it to be a 384kHz debate and they sorted that out quickly.

that's an up and coming technology, as is MIDI 2.0. these are a few things they could be working on. but do we care? if my next sound card happens to support 384kHz I'd love to use it but it'd have to come down to the sub $500 range.

[Bulemy]

found a discussion on Gearslutz.
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/masteri ... ugins.html

Non-linear processes create false HF content regardless of sample rate. Working at low sample rates like 44.1K causes that HF content to get mirrored down into the audible band while higher rates let that "junk" stay above the audible band. When you down-sample at the end of the project, that "junk" is removed without causing the alias distortion you'd get otherwise. Many high quality clippers & limiters use 2, 4 and even 8X oversampling internally. 8fs is important because most DACs are 8fs. That means an 8fs oversampling limiter can take care of inter-sample peaks that will be created in the DAC while non-8fs limiters won't.

Now, I agree that 384K is a bit excessive and prefer to operate at 88.2K or 96K for almost everything. I don't do much processing ITB these days though.

it started as a topic about the VST side of 384kHz but they wanted it to be a 384kHz debate and they sorted that out quickly.

that's an up and coming technology, as is MIDI 2.0. these are a few things they could be working on. but do we care? if my next sound card happens to support 384kHz I'd love to use it but it'd have to come down to the sub $500 range.

I already figured it out, here we are talking about working and exporting within a project with a sampling rate of 384 khz, it rather depends on the audio driver.
Now
more interesting why there is 64 bit wav export

[Tone Deft]

I already figured it out, here we are talking about working and exporting within a project with a sampling rate of 384 khz, it rather depends on the audio driver.

it probably involves how all your gear coordinates different sample rates. kind if like you need to pay attention to gain staging throughout your signal chain.

Now
more interesting why there is 64 bit wav export

very deep topic.

does this answer is for you?
https://help.ableton.com/hc/en-us/artic ... 32-bit-FAQ

Live 10 is 64 bit. there is a crowd here that was severely bit by converting their projects from Live 9's 32 bit to Live 10's 64 bit. search for those threads to read why they had problems. it'll shed light on the need for 64 bit, or why they didn't want it and why it's a pain in the ass to convert everything by hand.

[Tone Deft]

Cakewalk has 64 bit / 384 khz. Would be nice if ableton kept up!
By the way, Ableton - a fully 64 bit engine, or a hybrid of 32 bit?
Is it relevant?
https://www.ableton.com/en/manual/audio-fact-sheet/

really what you're getting at is that there's absolutely nothing special about Ableton's audio processing. there's no need to get Live if high performance interfaces are what you're looking to buy. don't count on them to release anything like it either, they've never been known to address user requests.

[pottering]

64 bit / 384 khz is marketing bullsh*t to fool amateurs and self-professed audiophiles.

[Tone Deft]

64 bit / 384 khz is marketing bullsh*t to fool amateurs and self-professed audiophiles.

can that be extended to 98Khz and 192kHz? 96kHz is overkill as it is, but it's common.

get our your pitch forks and defend the 44.1kHz/48kHz MONARCHY!!!



what do you have against people taking fools' money?

[pottering]

This video explains it well IMO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM

[Tone Deft]

This video explains it well IMO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM

a 23 minute video? only a world class window licker can to take 23 minutes to explain sample rates. did you really watch that video?? you're asking us to put aside 23 minutes of time? hell no.

if you feel the need to explain sample rate theory all over again kill me now.

[Bulemy]

64 bit / 384 khz is marketing bullsh*t to fool amateurs and self-professed audiophiles.

384khz is not marketing. By the way, ableton perfectly handles such files.

[Tone Deft]

64 bit / 384 khz is marketing bullsh*t to fool amateurs and self-professed audiophiles.

384khz is not marketing. By the way, ableton perfectly handles such files.

44.1kHz was a great start, it covers Nyquist's sampling theorem with the least processing power possible.
48kHz came along because 44.1kHz is a pointlessly awkward number.
96kHz is pretty ridiculous but SRCs down to 48kHz very well.
then the same for 192kHz, twice 48kHz, easy math, requires more power.
now double 192kHz to 384kHz because you can, the processing power is there. a 384kHz solution chipset probably costs a few more dollars per part these days but that margin will narrow.

does anyone care about 44.1kHz anymore?

hardware is catching up to audio very fast. it's conceivable that Live will run on an iPad within the next few years. who knows...

[Tone Deft]

heh, FWIW these are the chipsets most commonly used in A/D, D/A conversion. Cirrus Logic is one of the few chip makers left in a niche market. Analog Devices has always made great stuff and has acquired lots of smaller companies lately. theses two companies are always neck and neck with their offerings. designers like that because it can offer drop in replacements, a necessary part of electronics product design to prevent parts' stock from running out.

https://www.cirrus.com/#psearch_T300
nothing in the 384kHz range with their A/D offerings

https://www.cirrus.com/#psearch_T400
they DO have 384kHz D/A converters. interesting, tells you something about the behind the scenes designing of this new equipment. 384kHz is being used for D/A conversion only.


edit - and that leaves out all the FPGA IP cores available from Altera and Xilinx. talked to a company last week doing radar based ground imaging (Capella Space, great guys, amazing stuff) and the JESD204B (up to 30GHz signalling rate) A/D chips could be brought into the FPGAs (field programmable gate array, IOW a field programmable digital logic chip) and all it takes is a software license and hardware engineers to implement it.

[Da hand]

64 bit / 384 khz is marketing bullsh*t to fool amateurs and self-professed audiophiles.

384khz is not marketing. By the way, ableton perfectly handles such files.

It's not a problem of course if you feel that way Bulemy, but you simply saying it is not marketing, doesn't make it a valid point.

What projects are you working on that you feel would benefit a great deal from you being able to render them in 384khz instead of 192khz? Why?

What hardware do you currently own that can run that sampling rate? Do you even render projects in 192khz?

[jestermgee]

Why post the same thing multiple times????

Makes it no more valid and recon I’ll get no one that buys into it. Would love to hear what application you feel needs a resolution of that magnitude.

[Bulemy]

just read on the net what you need 384khz for. Read about sds. This was not invented for nothing. Personally, I think that at least, you can try to record the ultra-frequency sound of bats at a frequency of over 100 Hz, and then convert it to the range we can hear using repitch, sample this sound and get interesting results. (but that's just one option).