Ableton Forum

Hello,

I'm using a Dodotronic Ultramic 200

http://www.dodotronic.com/index.php/ult ... 16fd43adaa

that records at 200khz which I'm using to sample at a high rate and then stretch out/slow the sample. I'd like to do some work with this in Ableton but I've noticed that the highest sample rate I can import is 96khz. When I stretch the sample out I seem to get artifacts as if it was recorded at a lower sample rate.

Any advice as to how to raise the sample-rate of file imports in Ableton? Or has anyone worked with high sample-rate samples in Ableton?

Thanks!

have you got Hi-Q mode turned on for those clips?

You'll need to downsample them before you can use them in Live. I use an app called Myraid for this kind of thing, but there's probably some freebie options too out there.

downsampling to 96 kHz before importing into Live kinda defeats the purpose of recording at 200 kHz though.

if Hi-Q mode doesn't do the trick then your other option would be to use an audio interface that supports 192 kHz sample rate, and to set your Live project rate to 192 kHz. i guess it would also be a good idea to downsample to 192 kHz before importing.

fishmonkey wrote:downsampling to 96 kHz before importing into Live kinda defeats the purpose of recording at 200 kHz though.

I'd say that's not the only thing that defeats it…

Thanks, Tarekith and Fishmonkey. I wasn't aware of Hi Q, so thanks for the info! I do want to keep the sample rate high as Fishmonkey points out, but if 192k is the highest I can import I will need to downsample to 192, so Tarekith's info is helpful too.

Regards,

Hull

stringtapper wrote:

fishmonkey wrote:downsampling to 96 kHz before importing into Live kinda defeats the purpose of recording at 200 kHz though.

I'd say that's not the only thing that defeats it…

Ditto. This is the first time I've even heard of a 200kHz sample rate being used for anything, which is already way higher than I'd recommend for anything anyway.

Tarekith wrote:This is the first time I've even heard of a 200kHz sample rate being used for anything, which is already way higher than I'd recommend for anything anyway.

It's an ultrasonic MEMS microphone, they're advertising it for scientific resarch, like a USB-audio class compliant bat detector. The're fitted with either 192, 200, 250, 348 kHz converts in 16(!) bit resolution.

btw. the link above should read http://www.dodotronic.com/index.php/ult ... 52f3c22ed6.

Interesting, never heard of that one before. Thanks for the info.

Exactly, chrk. I don't intend use this mic with musical instruments or voices. I'm using it for recording insects and other natural sounds. It's one of several mics I use for field recording.

Live seems like an odd choice for that kind of work.

Also, a digital mic touted for scientific use that only records at 16-bit is a bit weird to me. Seems like it would be the exact kind of application that could potentially warrant the headroom of 24-bit (e.g. very loud environmental sounds, etc.).

fishmonkey wrote:downsampling to 96 kHz before importing into Live kinda defeats the purpose of recording at 200 kHz though.

if Hi-Q mode doesn't do the trick then your other option would be to use an audio interface that supports 192 kHz sample rate, and to set your Live project rate to 192 kHz. i guess it would also be a good idea to downsample to 192 kHz before importing.

Im wondering the purpose of 200k audio.

jlgrimes wrote:

fishmonkey wrote:downsampling to 96 kHz before importing into Live kinda defeats the purpose of recording at 200 kHz though.

if Hi-Q mode doesn't do the trick then your other option would be to use an audio interface that supports 192 kHz sample rate, and to set your Live project rate to 192 kHz. i guess it would also be a good idea to downsample to 192 kHz before importing.

Im wondering the purpose of 200k audio.

That's actually quite clear from the original post.

At the web site for what I assume is this mic (original link leads to a dead page) it says "To record or to listen [to] ultrasound". Ultrasound is commonly known as sound waves with frequencies above 20 kHz.

I question usefulness of the limited bit depth, but it seems to be a trait it shares with other current ultrasound products.

the bit depth isn't a deal breaker. the Dodotronic site says the mic has full 16 bit resolution.

http://www.dodotronic.com/index.php/ult ... c98ba2045f

fishmonkey wrote:the bit depth isn't a deal breaker. the Dodotronic site says the mic has full 16 bit resolution.

http://www.dodotronic.com/index.php/ult ... c98ba2045f

I assumed the makers think so. I don't think an extra 8 bits would have hurt much though, but it might have been a price factor considering the circuitry needs to fit inside the microphone itself. In field recordings in general I feel is where I need 24 bits the most.