Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-28-2009, 12:59 PM
Rupert Limehouse Rupert Limehouse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 7
Default Anyone recording at 192kHz?

Is anyone successfully recording high(ish) track counts in PT HD at 192kHz? I'm not interested in igniting a debate over the merits of high sample rates (although I'd recommend reading what Bob Katz has to say on the subject in 'Mastering Audio'), but rather just if you're managing to do it hassle free?

A little while ago I had a client in who insisted on tracking a rock band live at 192 because it sounded 'analogue'. Although we normally work at 44.1 or 96, we said we'd give it a go as we had done a basic test of a few tracks at 192 which was fine. It turned out to be a nightmare when we found we could record plenty of tracks (20+), but not get more than around 12 to play back without PT packing in. We tried all sorts of stuff including different types of drives, spreading across drives, changing buffers etc and cutting down the number of cards in the system, all to no avail. Time on the phone to Digi both in the UK and the States kind of left me with the impression that no-one was really doing this! (Or at least that the people I was speaking to had never tried it.)

The basics of my rig are:
PT HD5 Accel 7.4.2
Magma PE6R4 chassis
Apogee Rosetta 800 and AD16X with X-HD cards
Intel Mac Pro 2.8GHz 8 core, 12Gig RAM, OS 10.5

More details my setup here

I also posted this at GS where it was suggested that Digi say that track counts are significantly reduced when using a chassis, but the only thing I could find on the Digi site about this specifically said that my chassis is not affected. Someone else said that 3rd party interfaces (Apogee in my case) are well known for reducing track counts, although no-one so far has actually supported this with any first hand evidence! It may help/interest to know that I get the full track counts and more at sample rates up to 96k.

Thanks! (newb)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-28-2009, 01:23 PM
mixer mixer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Parrish fl. usa
Posts: 720
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

I know no one using 192.
__________________
www.garyvandy.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-28-2009, 01:28 PM
crizdee's Avatar
crizdee crizdee is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 10,605
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

Hi,

You should have got a lot more than 12 tracks

I'll do a check later and see how many i can run at 192. basically it should be 1/4 of that of a 48k session!!

But 192 is probably very rare and not many people have real world regular experience with it.

Chris
__________________
PT MAC Troubleshooting... http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=54888

Producer, Engineer,
UKmastering Mixing & Mastering
Blinders_Columbia top 40 UK album charts
Slow Readers Club Joy Of The Return #9 UK album charts

www.ukmastering.com


PT10.3.10 Mountain Lion HD6 accel Magma PE6R4 D Command 32 MacPro 12 Core 3.46ghz UAD-2 Octo x2. Manley Vari-Mu, Manley Massive Passive, SSL VHD, ADL600, Grove Tubes ViPre, Tube-Tech CL-1B. Hafler TRM active monitoring.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-28-2009, 01:34 PM
studiojimi's Avatar
studiojimi studiojimi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,115
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

Quote:
Originally Posted by crizdee View Post
Hi,

192 is probably very rare and not many people have real world regular experience with it.

Chris
i have recorded 2 classical guitar CD where just the guitar was recorded on 1 track

and a folk CD with 2 guitars

the sound was ridiculously good in my opinion

my waves worked for me in thost sessions

more than my dog can tell the difference

whether you can tell it when it get so the mp3 ha ha

is another thread in the making.

i thought a lot of guys do tape transfers to 192 before going lower

i thought i heard that a few years back . . . i dunno.

i usually use 88.2
__________________
CAZADOR RECORDING
PT10.3.10/HD6/192w16in/MTN.LION OS 10.8.5 / Westmere MacPro 8 Core W/20gRAM MAGMA-PE6R4/TDM&RTAS/WAVES Platinum/UA/Eventide Plugs/I usually record at 88.2
With GOD as my partner. . . I need to make my plans LARGER.

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-28-2009, 01:43 PM
crizdee's Avatar
crizdee crizdee is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 10,605
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

Hi,

Just opened a new 192 session and i could only get 36 voices @ 6x DSP

With a Magma PE6R4 chassis, but don't think that makes a difference.

So that would be a max of 36 mono audio tracks. i thought i would get 48

Chris
__________________
PT MAC Troubleshooting... http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=54888

Producer, Engineer,
UKmastering Mixing & Mastering
Blinders_Columbia top 40 UK album charts
Slow Readers Club Joy Of The Return #9 UK album charts

www.ukmastering.com


PT10.3.10 Mountain Lion HD6 accel Magma PE6R4 D Command 32 MacPro 12 Core 3.46ghz UAD-2 Octo x2. Manley Vari-Mu, Manley Massive Passive, SSL VHD, ADL600, Grove Tubes ViPre, Tube-Tech CL-1B. Hafler TRM active monitoring.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-28-2009, 02:32 PM
Craig F Craig F is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,591
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

I have used 192 a few times for recover of analog sources

I might use it for small arrangements (nothing more that a quartet)
a number of plugs don't work at 192 or they didn't last time I checked
__________________
...

"Fly High Freeee click psst tic tic tic click Bird Yeah!" - dave911

PT11 System Requirements link http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/C...m-Requirements


Thank you,

Craig
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-28-2009, 04:10 PM
c-tone c-tone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,120
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

The most voices you can get at 192k is 36.

I used it to print mixes from an analog console when HD first came out, but I haven't seen anyone else use it.
__________________
www.clifnorrell.com
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-28-2009, 10:01 PM
Grey Grey is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 296
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

used it a few times for solo guitar or piano or when cutting string parts
sounds really good but is cumbersome to deal with..ie...file size... conversions...archive..etc

i work mostly in 48k for post sound

does the buying public really notice??
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-28-2009, 10:09 PM
WernerF WernerF is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York City
Posts: 3,052
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

I know that the OP said that he didn't want to ignite a debate about the value of higher sample rates, but really, there's a heck of a lot of info out there that is the result of opinions offered by experts in the technical aspect of this technology that sample rates make no difference in the sound quality of the recording. They conclude that the bit rate and the quality of the converters is what matters. I only say this because it seems that a client who makes a ridiculous technical demand should be called on the absurdity of that request. We all should keep our, and our clients, priorities in order.

My two cents.....
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-29-2009, 03:28 AM
Rupert Limehouse Rupert Limehouse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 7
Default Re: Anyone recording at 192kHz?

Quote:
Originally Posted by crizdee View Post
Hi,

Just opened a new 192 session and i could only get 36 voices @ 6x DSP

With a Magma PE6R4 chassis, but don't think that makes a difference.

So that would be a max of 36 mono audio tracks. i thought i would get 48

Chris
Thanks - good to compare notes, although we also had no trouble opening the session with enough tracks, or even recording them, it was just playing back more than 12(ish) that caused problems.

WernerF - I'm not going to enter the 'does it sound better' debate, but I can't agree more that in this instance it would have been better to persuade the client to cut down to 96k, which would have also meant much better foldback provision (something we had explained to him beforehand - I won't bore you with the details here of why). And I'm sure the musicians would have performed better without all the stress that was flying around. However this was quite a big 'name' producer who didn't seem keen on changing his mind

Cheers,


Rupert.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Profire 2626 recording 192khz?? Kemo3ce macOS 2 12-19-2012 08:32 PM
Recording 192khz gives audio error 6061? olamo macOS 0 03-18-2012 01:53 PM
192khz recording capt kirk Pro Tools 9 1 02-12-2012 10:16 AM
I cant go to 192KHZ KINGDRAGON Tips & Tricks 2 01-30-2010 12:57 AM
ye or ne ---- 176/192khz recording/mixing blumediaprojekt Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) 9 12-30-2005 11:04 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:40 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com