Posts by chilly7


    Seriously dude, what's wrong with you?

    i do not like people who twist or change words or meaning of other people have seid.
    even a singel changed or tiwsted word can change the meaning radicaly, and it is what that man does all the time or
    at list in this thread. That man try to look like he has a big knowladge and give us alot of technical staff which
    might be correct in most cases but he twist or change one or a fwe words or numbers in that info he gives and that the over meaning what he saying is complitely
    falls then. and he wants that falls meaning to give to awrybody.
    as it was seid by the God thouse who will change or twist even a singel word in original Bible will be in Hell.
    Well that man does not change the Bible but that man gives a correct information in which one or couple changed or twisted words which maked the overal meaning falls.
    that what makes me too angre

    No, but you have to admit it might raise some new issues. Like having different max delay times depending on the current sample rate (which is currently not the case). Nothing impossible, at first sight.


    Anyway, do you have an idea of why Access didn't already make these sampling rates available?

    ok u can ask the same question tape in 1000 BC why Microsoft did no bring Windows 7 already?
    get it?!
    p.s. if something is still not implemented already it does not meen that it is not a good feature....

    so I would be upset if Access came along and said hey we've quartered the polyphony on the virus just to satisfy a couple of nutters... can you imagine??

    why u puting nonsence again?!
    didn't we seid that 96khz should an option. 48 woulkd be still awailable if u need more poliphony.
    p.s. ok, please leave this thread now!!!

    nicely seid,Totaly agree :thumbup:

    :thumbup:


    sorry guys little oftopic:
    ok. i never want to be offensive.
    yes u might be right but in the same time that man sounds exectly like thouse who will figh to death and will tell
    $ 200 guitar sound exectly the same as $5000 and u do not need to buy 5000$ guitar, or thouse people who
    tell that aliens does not exist with no knowladge about that topic and all their will guesses are based on just looking in to the sky.
    and if they did not see anything that means it does not exist. and what makes me more angree that they state their
    willguesses as a truth.
    so i am stoping on that and will better ignore that man.
    now lets back on topic
    There are a reasons why modern Phisical moddeling VSTs alow u to use a huge upsampling and alow u to run
    at 96khz rate. they did not put thouse staff just for fan, but there re is a benefit of using it. and even if u will down
    sample the end result to 48khz there still will be benefit


    chose 44.1 kHz as a sample rate for CD audio with very good reason and that 48 kHz is enough of a concession to relax the requirements of SRC by having a huge guard band (4 kHz!) whilst keeping the bandwidth low.


    All the while forgetting that almost nobody can hear 18 kHz, let alone 20kHz anyway!

    44.1 at 16 bit was selected not because it is perfect but because they could not put more because cd has a very limited space and in that time DVD or Blurays
    was not invented. also a couple TB hardrivers was not mainstream too...
    actualy orginaly they wanted to put 36Khz at 10 bit sample rate but it was so bad that they ended up with 44.1 at 16 bit because they could not put more.

    wtf? difficulty in reproducing it? You really don't seem very good at understanding things man and I have no idea what on earth you are doing repeatedly involving yourself in the topic in this and other threads. Pick a topic you actually know about if you feel the need to comment. It keeps things focused and saves the time of people having to correct you.

    agree, i am tied of that anoying man, it seems he just laying on the couch by TV all day long and he does not know how to spend his time so he post
    nonsence on the forum



    Incidentally - there is a discrepancy in the behaviour in some circumstances between 44.1 kHz and 48 kHz - which I would put down to being a feature of the Virus... It's by no means a physical limitation. Also, the difficulty in reproducing it also demonstrates what a fringe issue it is.

    man u do not need that feature then blow away, because sombody needs that future

    that pitch doubling trick could yield some interesting results. In theory this should replicate the effects although it obviously doesn't adress the big issue of just wanting that kind of performance to stream live out of the machine to reference while you work and save the time of workarounds. As that file above indicates, there's significant difference between 44 and 48. None of us really has any idea how much improvement we'd see from running it at 88 or 96k without actually doing it. I'm going to have to do some tests.


    Sure you can capture and then upsample.. but if the top end sheen is filtered off and a little aliased at the source then there lies the issue. The virus is well documented for having a darker sound, which would disappear when operating at higher sample rates making the darker sound an option rather than automatic.

    I think it is nonsence, "if u want to get a dark sound just lower the sample rate"
    so if i want a really dark sound should i run awrything at 10 Khz?! bla-bla.
    p.s. Just use a lowpass filter man or eq it!

    totaly agree that qulity should be #1 and only #1 priority.
    Then quanity should come next, but not in reverse.
    p.s. so hopefuly there will be 96 or 88.2 native sample rates from Virus as soon as possible, because othervise Access loses
    too many Studio customers who will go to VSTs alternatives because for a modern VSts high sample rate
    or high oversampling is not something unique at all FX expansions DCam Synth Squade, Uhe Ace or Berlin Modular and many more examples....

    If I understand correctly from previous posts by the moderators, the physical modeling bit IS done at a higher sampling rate (could be even higher than 96kHz), and it is downsampled later in the process, probably to save up on delay/reverb/etc. memory, and FX computing power. Please remember that whatever you do it is always low-pass filtered at around 20kHz, so according to Nyquist, you are covered.

    it is still not clear that Nyquist is a "Holy Bible" retorecly speaking...
    it term might be used alot as excuse for a lazyness why Audio Cd standart is not still kicked out already in 2012 year, but that is not a point.
    luckely nowdays more and more there are possibilities to distribute ur music in high defenition audio to masses.
    For example with Blurays or some online stores. also DVD Audio is not really common but it is possible to find it to buy.
    but awry years there are more possibilities and even a big distributors and Labels begin to carry DVD Audios....



    Hi
    as u seid true, that is ur "personal opinion", but it is not ur "knowladge" 96 vs 48...
    but speaking from my "knowladge" but not my "personal opinion" 96 KHz is not just wide frequancy range, but physical modeling software indeed works better at 96khz, belive it or not.
    Since Virus is nota rompler but is VA it will benefit as well.
    I am not saying that 48 khz is crupp or there is a night and a day difference compare to 96khz but 96khz give a quit better sound quality compare to 48khz.
    p.s. What we want from Acces just put them an option to run their synths at 4 different native sample rates 44.1, 48, 88.2 and 96khz. and people according to
    their needs will decide what they need more polyphony or less plyphony but a splighly better sound. i am pretty shure in 90 % of studio use 96 and 88.2 Khz
    sample rates will be really aprishiated, ofcause for a live use thouse sample rates can be used too, because not many of us need a vey big polyphony as well


    sorry for my English it is not my native language but i hope u can understand me..... ;)

    :thumbup:

    It seems that u don't know what u are tolking about and why in most proffesional studios either 88.2 or 96khz sample rate
    are used and what benefits will bring thouse native sample rates to Virus even thought that polyphony might be reduced twise.
    p.s. Please if u have no intrest in thouse sample rates please do not post anything here :!:

    None of us who has any handle on reality believes our Virus was made without room for improvement so do save the comment about how they "got it right". We continue to see improvements to the Virus every year which is a driving force behind the unique value of the Virus. While you're "sure people prefer more voices", there are a LOT of users (most of which aren't hanging out on this forum) who would make use of a high performance mode at the cost of reduced polyphony. Obviously this would be for studio recording, not live.


    on the topic of trolling though, what on earth are you doing commenting in a thread about something you have no interest in, requested by people who obviously have different needs and interests than you? What we're after is to have 88/96 enabled as an OPTION that anyone can use or not use according to their needs.

    That was my initial thoughts :thumbup:

    Yes you certainly should resist the urge. It saves me the time of having to repeat myself or post up examples of how much more the sound & filters open up when running above 44k.
    While you might not care about these things AntonyB, I have dropped around $30k into my studio the last 3 years and very much care about the idea of getting better performance & increased flexibility out of my $3400 investment. Especially if it can come from simply enabling two higher sample rates.


    The Virus hardware is capable of a higher performance mode at the cost of polyphony. The bandwidth can also support a pair of stereo outs at 88/96 via USB as well as by S/PDIF.


    As it stands, the Virus needs to operate at an even multiple of your sound card's sample rate. This is why when working at 96k the Virus operates at 48 but at 88k it operates at only 44k internally.
    VC appears to handle the simple (x2) SRC.
    It would seem to reason then that the Virus could be enabled to operate at 88khz internally for people working at either 44 or 88khz.

    totaly agree :thumbup:

    when i am doing DVD Audio i need 96khz though.....
    88.2 is good only if u will down sample it to Audio CD, so deithering is better then if u would go from 96Khz,
    but if u doing DVD Audio or Bluray 96khz is standart over there..... :)

    ok.we need 44.1, 48, 88.2,96Khz then :thumbsup:
    Are u happy? 8o

    there are parts in the virus sound engine which run on higher sampling rates internally. there are certain things which highly benefit from this extra precision but there are others which wouldn't. this way you get the best result.
    marc

    Hello
    My point is that don't be afraid to implement 96khz native resolution if not in the current but at list in a new gen Virus. :thumbup:
    Plyphony? Well just provide 3 modes 44.1,48 and 96Khz and the problem is solved and all targed adience is happy.