wezx
Experienced
Ah yes, but we've been enjoying ourselves reading your witty banter! ;-)
absolutely, i actually have several great pre's that have the split already built in. its more for the reamping part so that i can just use the axefx as a digital insert (via AES) for fidelity (no extra conversion roundtrips), lower latency, and convenience.
unfortunately, the afx is halfway there. the sounds are great, its just the connectivity that kind of sucks. itd be great if it sounded terrible as well, then itd be a complete loss, oh well, move on. but to have it halfway there and dangled in front of you is just annoying.
well, the extent of your help and common courtesy was to bitch about my bitching, so. . . thanks?Actually I spent about 5 mins and it does involve me. I am a member of the forum and actually try on occasion to help others with my limited knowledge. You brought up a valid concern and it has been brought up many times over the last 5 years and answered many times over. I simply pointed out, as others have, that a little common courtesy goes a long way when asking others for their help and/or opinions. Sorry if I touched on a sore spot or something.
of course it wont happen, its impossible to do a direct comparison of a project containing recorded audio and vst instruments at two different sample rates without performing src on the audio and thereby skewing the test. theres plenty of info out there on the benefits of working ITB at 96k, i dont wish to even bother getting into that discussion.
what are you talking about? there would be an audible difference, but the difference could be attributed as much to the SRC on the audio as it would be to the recording samplerate or internal plugin processing. this is why i dont want to get into this discussion -- do some reading on the topic. i dont care to be the educator.
my work is irrelevant to the topic, and im not at liberty to be posting files of my clients work. but if you need "credibility" or whatever: google jesse colin young, ive recorded and mastered some of his stuff. google adam cross, i recorded, produced, and mixed his debut album. google mike frost, i recorded, mixed, and mastered his last album.
and you will find no one who can intelligently argue that 44.1 is better, only that it is sufficient.
and you will find that those arguments are with regard to recorded audio, not internal processing of vst effects and, more importantly, vst instruments -- where it is pretty well understood that there is a significant sonic benefit when the plugins in question are coded to take advantage of the higher rate.
