Pro Tools compatibilty (1 Viewer)

Jimmy Magee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2002
Messages
2,358
Location
RTE
Website
www.myspace.com
I'm planning to do some recording in various places, so I wants an idea of what protools sessions can be transferred to where - which versions are compatible with which?

Hugs & kisses
 

dudley

Super Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Contributor
Since 1999
Joined
Nov 8, 1999
Messages
10,308
Location
Dublin Town
Website
www.thedudleycorporation.com
sample rate is v important to bear in mind.
the protool recordings we did when we started our current record where done at 88hkskkoz.
if you plan to use protools with an mbox, the highest it can get to is 44,000kfskhzzz. sessions recorded at 88 can't be opened by an mbox, and apparently downsampling sounds terrible.

means we've had very protracted gaps between recording sessions, which has been a pain
so there
 

egg_

nerd/hippy
Supporter
Since 1999
Joined
Nov 15, 1999
Messages
11,832
Location
Where dogs wear hats and birds fly backwards
zebra heart attack said:
even if it the highest anyone will hear it is 44? does it actually make a difference?
Yes
Not because people can hear up there, but because if you're recording at 44.1kHz everything above 22.05kHz is filtered out of the signal (to avoid aliasing) ... and because it's impossible for a real-world filter to pass 100% of the signal at 22.00kHz and 0% at 22.05kHz, the filter rolls off some of your treble (or worse). If you're sampling at 88kHz, you can allow anything up to 44kHz to hit your convertors, so you can build a much simpler filter that filtering at say 30kHz and gradually rolls off to say 42kHz, so none of the audible part of your signal is affected by the filter
 

ernesto

Big stanks
Supporter
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
16,897
Solutions
1
Location
in my head
Website
strikeaction.bandcamp.com
egg_ said:
Yes
Not because people can hear up there, but because if you're recording at 44.1kHz everything above 22.05kHz is filtered out of the signal (to avoid aliasing) ... and because it's impossible for a real-world filter to pass 100% of the signal at 22.00kHz and 0% at 22.05kHz, the filter rolls off some of your treble (or worse). If you're sampling at 88kHz, you can allow anything up to 44kHz to hit your convertors, so you can build a much simpler filter that filtering at say 30kHz and gradually rolls off to say 42kHz, so none of the audible part of your signal is affected by the filter
what he said
 

RED(tape)MENACE

Well-Known Member
Since 2000
Joined
Nov 5, 2000
Messages
6,529
Website
www.myspace.com
Also, eq and similar processing creates phase anomalies and funky crap.. if you record at a high sample rate, then a lot of that crap happens above the threshold of hearing. Happy happy.
There's loadsa stuff out there.. engineers are crazy. There's tech papers and all sorts of mad shit. Google.
 

C24

New Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
24
Hi there,

If you are swapping between platforms (mac > PC or vice versa) you'll have to save as mac/pc compatible (Version 7 is now automatically compatible with both).

With regard the sample rates: It's probably worth doing the recording at whatever the mixing rate is going to be. If you are starting with a basic tracking session - maybe drums, bass etc - and then overdubbing later with an mBox or the like - and if you can mix it at 88.2 - I would do the tracking at this sample rate and later upsample overdubs back into the tracking session for mixing. You can hire very good upsampling algorithms for this if you want to be really fussy - but you theoretically lose nothing in upsampling.

Agreed though downsampling sounds pretty bad...

Hope this helps...
 

kings lead hat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2003
Messages
1,417
Location
london
dudley said:
sample rate is v important to bear in mind.
the protool recordings we did when we started our current record where done at 88hkskkoz.
if you plan to use protools with an mbox, the highest it can get to is 44,000kfskhzzz. sessions recorded at 88 can't be opened by an mbox, and apparently downsampling sounds terrible.

means we've had very protracted gaps between recording sessions, which has been a pain
so there

Mbox can do 44.1 and 48k
downsizing freom 88 to 44.1 shouldnt really be a problem cos its exactly half the sample rate whereas 48 to 44.1 is a cunt

dont downsample id u get into this problem to much number crunching
re record through a patchbay youre 48 stuff into 44.1 anologuly..??
 

RED(tape)MENACE

Well-Known Member
Since 2000
Joined
Nov 5, 2000
Messages
6,529
Website
www.myspace.com
Any kind of sample rate reduction is a *Bad Idea*. I'd sooner stay at 48k the whole way than do some tracking at 88, then overdubs and mixing at 48k.
 

kraster

New Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
210
It's quite feasible and provable that a higher sample rate is worse than a lower one. Why? Because the higher the sample rate the less accurate the sampling becomes. Components can't keep their accuracy at higher sampling rates. Capacitor recharging etc. in the sample and hold circuit of a system can be less accurate at 88.2 than at 44.1. The antialiasing filter issue has been a non issue for a long time. All samplers within the last ten years use oversampling up to a really high rate and a perfect brickwall filter can be constructed without phase distortion. The signal is then downsampled and all the stuff above Nyquist is eliminated.

The issue is not frequency. Most microphones don't go beyond 20khz so what's the point? The issue is implementation of the sampling theorem ie. good clocking, error correction, antialiasing and anti-imaging filterering etc. etc.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Activity

Loading…

We're listening to...

  • Brain Development Lullabies
    Menuetto from Gallimathias Musicum
    Music Box Orchestra
    Brain Development Lullabies

Support thumped.com

Support thumped.com and upgrade your account

Upgrade your account now to disable all ads... If we had any... Which we don't right now.

Upgrade now

Latest posts

Trending Threads

Latest threads

Top