Solaris and the XITE-1 @96k

The Sonic Core XITE hardware platform for Scope

Moderators: valis, garyb

djmicron
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Milano

Re: Solaris and the XITE-1 @96k

Post by djmicron »

garyb wrote:*warning* gross generalizations follow....

higher samplerates are not necessary for better sound. they are needed to make programming of filters easier, as aliasing can be ignored as the samplerate increases since the aliasing will be so far beyond human hearing. lower samplerates are more likely to experience aliasing that occurs near the range of human hearing. it doesn't matter if there are frequencies that a human can experience beyond 20k. almost NO playback speakers can reliably produce sounds above 18k and most only are usable in the 12-15k range at best.

basicallly 96k is something that makes crappy programming sound better. it also allows even good programming to require less attention from the programmer. if gear was made the way it used to be, in the early 70's and before when bic lighters were unacceptable and nobody had the stupid idea that they should get useful things for free, 44.1k would be more than acceptable. what proves this is that some early DACs, while having specs that are nowhere near the specs of the current hardware, actually SOUNDED better than almost everything made now. they're just too expensive to make that way. quality is always preferrable to quantity, except in the pocketbook.
I totally agree
User avatar
Sounddesigner
Posts: 1063
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:06 pm

Re: Solaris and the XITE-1 @96k

Post by Sounddesigner »

@Garyb . Sure, i've read about development techniques that counter the digital aliasing problem without oversampling and other higher samplerate methods, but this is a 'theory vs practice' arguement. In practice high-end developers tend to use higher samplerates (algorithmix, SonicCore, etc). What goes on in practice is the reality with developers, and for users sometimes the high-end and crappy pseudo-high-end plugins that benifit from higher samplerates are all we have so higher-rates is still needed for that reason (these plugins are all we have), it's the practice and reality that counts, "you go to war with the army you have".

PS. There are monitors and microphones designed for higher samplerates thus if some users wish to have high samplerate recordings for their personal use and for a niche group why not record at 96khz? Everything is'nt always made for the mass market, i think SCOPE is evident of that :) . That said, high samplerate recordings is not my concern thus i won't put up much of a arguement for that, and i probably could'nt hear the audible sounds above 44khz standard when recorded, but for digital plugins that are available to us such as synths, compressors, eq's, amp sims, pitch correctors, etc higher samplerates are a concern and preferred cause "in practice they matter".
Last edited by Sounddesigner on Sat Sep 07, 2013 4:56 pm, edited 15 times in total.
djmicron
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Milano

Re: Solaris and the XITE-1 @96k

Post by djmicron »

@dawman
have you tried connecting the solaris over analog outputs without forcing it to sync with external digital gear ?

Sometimes sample rate conversion is better done over 2 steps of DA > AD conversion.

I remember my nord modular, it was great over 18 bit DA converters.
dawman
Posts: 14368
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Solaris and the XITE-1 @96k

Post by dawman »

Solaris sounds fine using analog outs into my powered monitors. The whole reason I use the Digital I/Os is to have the best signal for the SpaceF Filters I like to use in a BCModular Patch.

But as GaryB said the idea that 96k sounds better might not be as important as the way it Processes data and avoids the smearing of waveforms, etc.
neuromantik
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:34 am

Re: Solaris and the XITE-1 @96k

Post by neuromantik »

Sounddesigner wrote:neuromantik i suggest you and others who want better 96khz compatibility with XITE-1 write Sonic Core and request it so they know a large enough group of customers want or need it. I work at 96khz and i wrote them years ago, Ralf Dressel at Sonic Core confirmed that some synths benifit from 96khz such as Poison, Vectron and Modular 3, etc but said some synths don't such as Minimax, Profit 5, Prodissey, etc cause they do oversampling. So Sonic Core confirmed what i was hearing.
...
That said, ATM i simply avoide alot of Modular 4 patches at 96khz and use the ones that have no problem. I avoide lots of voices with some synths and do other things to make 96khz work. Mod 4 has many patches that are more problematic than previouse versions of modular so you'll need to do alot of testing to figure out wich ones work best and can delete the ones that work worse.
...
Thanks for the helpful feedback :) I'm actually not particularly interested in recording @ 96kHz but really running ModIV at that sampling rate.. I'm trying to make some convincing arguments (ie. raw patches, nothing too fancy) to some friends of mine who are hardcore G2 users but are concerned about SCOPE audio quality. They are sold on Solaris as is everybody but of course prefer the ModIV interface as it is the logical successor to the G2. Anyhow thanks for the thorough explanations, I'll write S|C about the issue. Actually on a more general note, is there a roadmap somewhere about what may or may not be covered by SCOPE 6? TBH with a platform as rich as SCOPE, I'm more interested in getting the things we have to work flawlessly (ie. professional tools) than having new devices/instruments. .02
jksuperstar
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:57 pm

Re: Solaris and the XITE-1 @96k

Post by jksuperstar »

I had the G2 for nearly 10 years as my only synth. And I have no regrets about choosing S|C's Modular over the G2. The difficulties I had with making the G2 sound more musical and less clinical, in terms of patch complexity and # of flaming hoops to jump through, are all but gone in SCOPE. Granted, the G2 could be disconnected from a pc, seemed a bit mo performance oriented, and the keys version meant never needing to assign a midi controller ever.

But the BCmodular additions also mean I don't need to make assignments either, and can now build sub-modules...allowing for loading full modules via midi prog change. Still, not as fast as the G2, but on the XITE I can load a couple patches at once anyways. And add effects afterward that the G2 never even dreamt of.

Anyways, the scope modular at 44.1 bests the G2. Easily.
Post Reply