Page 4 of 4 < 1 2 3 4
Topic Options
#5779 - 03/26/09 11:00 PM Re: MC Performance on Mac Pro - Disappointing [Re: Mateusz Wozniak PSP]
Bhonem Offline
Member

Registered: 01/26/09
Posts: 5
 Originally Posted By: Mateusz Wozniak PSP
There is no difference in the algorithm except that the plug-in is working in doubled sample rate. The conversion itself is very transparent.

Regards,


Thanks for clarifying that.
Another question is there any benefit at all in engaging the FAT mode when you already work at high sample rates like 88k or 96k???

Because whenever engage the FAT mode when working at those rates all I get is distortion and the plugin can't cope, it's not my computer I have an 8core MacPro but even when my CPUs aren't full like when I'm just starting to mix when I'm on a high sample rate the plugin just can't cope.

Top
#5788 - 04/13/09 10:24 AM Re: MC Performance on Mac Pro - Disappointing [Re: Bhonem]
Bhonem Offline
Member

Registered: 01/26/09
Posts: 5
is there any benefit of engaging FAT mode when your already working in 96K?? anyone??

Top
#5789 - 04/21/09 06:52 AM Re: MC Performance on Mac Pro - Disappointing [Re: Bhonem]
Mateusz Wozniak PSP Offline

Member

Registered: 10/28/01
Posts: 1306
Some users still hear the difference however from technical point of view double sampling at 96kHz would give just a little fraction of a benefit when you double sample at 44.1 or 48kHz.
_________________________
Mateusz Wozniak
PSPaudioware.com

Top
Page 4 of 4 < 1 2 3 4