Cubase 5 @ 96Khz problematic...suggestions?

symbolofmylife · 2012-05-31T13:21:39+00:00

Hi Guys, MY pc setup at home is as follows: i5 3 GHZ, , 8 GB DDR3 Ram, Seagate 1TB HDD 7200rpm 6GB/s 32MB (partitioned), Windows 7 64x with a Focusrite Sca...

Cubase 5 @ 96Khz problematic...suggestions?

Malkav

Chad Adam Browne wrote: Have you tried freezing the tracks running the vsts?

Not yet no. Will that still enable me to edit them (the midi events)?
[/quote]

Nope, you gotta unfreeze the one you wanna work on in order to edit it again, a little time consuming but it can free up enough resources to get things running well again.

Also certain VSTs kill processing power, for instance sometimes running 1 instance of Omnisphere can completely own a PC, depending on how complex the synth is...

greetings

1. Make sure your power setting is set to high performance.

2. Don't record at 32 bit. Record at 96 kHz, 24 bit. Your computer should easily handle it. I don't even think the 2i2 supports 32 bit floating. 96 kHz, 24 bit is the professional audio standard, I don't think you need more than that. I do know that many mastering studios still don't support 32 bit floating yet.

3. A separate harddrive would help, but you shouldn't have these problems without it.

symbolofmylife

Frodo Baggins wrote: 1. Make sure your power setting is set to high performance.

2. Don't record at 32 bit. Record at 96 kHz, 24 bit. Your computer should easily handle it. I don't even think the 2i2 supports 32 bit floating. 96 kHz 24 bit is the professional audio standard, I don't think you need more than that. I do know that many mastering studios still don't support 32 bit floating yet.

3. A separate harddrive would help, but you shouldn't have these problem without it.

Thanks! On the Focusrite, you're right....silly me....it only supports 24....so I'll change that tonight and see if it makes a difference. You think it will? (I also read on some forum that 32 float and 24 are basically the same apparently, so that's why I ask)

As far as I remember I did set the pc to maximize performance, but will also double check.

Malkav

Frodo Baggins wrote: 2. Don't record at 32 bit. Record at 96 kHz, 24 bit. Your computer should easily handle it. I don't even think the 2i2 supports 32 bit floating. 96 kHz, 24 bit is the professional audio standard, I don't think you need more than that. I do know that many mastering studios still don't support 32 bit floating yet.

Very valid points here ?

I know it may seem like a weird thing to bring up but with guitars I normally tend to record at 46kHz just cause if you bounce down to 44.1kHz from 96kHz you lose a bit of headroom which makes anticipating how the guitar will sound in a mix a little difficult ? If this isn't for a cd release then don't worry about that, I just like to make sure things sound as similar in my DAW as they will through a stereo ?

symbolofmylife

Chad Adam Browne wrote:
Frodo Baggins wrote: 2. Don't record at 32 bit. Record at 96 kHz, 24 bit. Your computer should easily handle it. I don't even think the 2i2 supports 32 bit floating. 96 kHz, 24 bit is the professional audio standard, I don't think you need more than that. I do know that many mastering studios still don't support 32 bit floating yet.
Very valid points here ?

I know it may seem like a weird thing to bring up but with guitars I normally tend to record at 46kHz just cause if you bounce down to 44.1kHz from 96kHz you lose a bit of headroom which makes anticipating how the guitar will sound in a mix a little difficult ? If this isn't for a cd release then don't worry about that, I just like to make sure things sound as similar in my DAW as they will through a stereo ?

So actually, save for 46khz I may as well just stick with 44.1 than actually?

nick

ez wrote:
<WINDOZE USERS> can you tell your computer to NOT put your CPU in power saving mode? Linux puts CPUs in a lower clockspeed mode when they don't work very hard, and this messes with realtime/low latency audio, but you can tell it to stay put at 3GHz or whatever.

If its an Intel CPU, disable C1E in the BIOS, this is the the feature that lowers the CPU clockrate to save power.

Malkav

symbolofmylife wrote: So actually, save for 46khz I may as well just stick with 44.1 than actually?

Well it really depends on the scenario, I just think that in the case of some guitar tones recording them at a higher samplerate becomes redundant and makes your mix unpredictable ?

greetings

Don't you mean 48kHz? (not 46kHz)

32 bit and 24 bit definitely aren't the same. I wouldn't bother with 32 just yet, it's not supported widely enough and plenty of great records were even made at 16 bit. That does lower dynamic range though. 16 bit range = 96dB and 24 bit range = 144dB.

We had a workshop with Young Guru (Jay-Z's recording engineer) two weeks ago, and he still records at 44.1kHz, and 24 bit. With a higher sample rate like 96 kHz your latency will be slightly lower, though. There is a reason that audio moved to 96kHz/24 bit. I think it has something to do with making sure that some sort of digital noise floor was completely eradicated from the sampling process (if I remember correctly, it was something to do with eradicating noise).

I would go 96/24. It's quite simply higher quality (more samples per second). But, funnily enough, the guy who makes Lavry converters says sample rates above 96kHz are just marketing hype and don't make any noticeable difference to the sound. He actually said that sampling above 96kHz could be detrimental to the sound, so he sticks to 96kHz. I can't tell you all the scientific reasons as I don't know enough about it.

greetings

Oh, and using 32 bit though it isn't supported probably was the reason, as the hardware doesn't support it.

majestikc

Stick with 24 bits and 44.1khz sample rate and you'll be more than fine.

The sample rate is the thing that craps on your cpu, so doubling it to 96khz is effectively halving your cpu/putting twice as much strain on it (for no real noticeable gains)

The sample rate can be thought of as how often or how much the sound is described.

CD quality audio has 44,100 of these measurements a second. That’s called 44.1 kilohertz (khz).

The bit rate can be thought of as how well the sound is described.

CD quality audio has 65,536 volumes to choose from for every sample that’s measured. That’s called 16-bit audio (because 2 to the 16th power is 65,536).

greetings

majestikc wrote: Stick with 24 bits and 44.1khz sample rate and you'll be more than fine.

The sample rate is the thing that craps on your cpu, so doubling it to 96khz is effectively halving your cpu/putting twice as much strain on it (for no real noticeable gains)

The sample rate can be thought of as how often or how much the sound is described.

CD quality audio has 44,100 of these measurements a second. That’s called 44.1 kilohertz (khz).

The bit rate can be thought of as how well the sound is described.

CD quality audio has 65,536 volumes to choose from for every sample that’s measured. That’s called 16-bit audio (because 2 to the 16th power is 65,536).

He has an i5 quad core and 8gb RAM. It should be no problem to run at 96/24.

The gains are noticeable. Well, I can notice them.

majestikc

I haven't tested it for a long time, I dropped to 44.1 a while back (2yrs maybe) BECAUSE of cpu issues and never tried it since, I'll test it out tonight.

(when mixing you can always push the sample rate up to 1024, always had problems with Sonar skipping midi notes if it went any higher than that)

greetings

Yeah, during mixing the buffer size doesn't matter.

symbolofmylife

Frodo Baggins wrote: Oh, and using 32 bit though it isn't supported probably was the reason, as the hardware doesn't support it.

Seems to have been it yes. Switching to 24 also seems to have reduced my latency to around 44ms from 150...good!

greetings

44ms? That's way too much. You should easily be able to get under 10ms with your system. Even under 5ms. Run your buffer at 128 samples, or 64 samples if there are no glitches. Tell me your settings and I will see if I can help.

symbolofmylife

Frodo Baggins wrote: 44ms? That's way too much. You should easily be able to get under 10ms with your system. Even under 5ms. Run your buffer size at 128 samples, or 64 samples if there are no glitches. Tell me your settings and I will see if I can help.

I have not messed with the buffer setting again yet since yesterday. Kinda slipped my mind...I will check them tonight (I think they're running pretty high atm) and report over the weekend.

Mo-Facta

I would just like to summarize some things I picked up from reading this thread.

1. You computer is plenty powerful so it's not the PC. I can almost guarantee that 100%. I had a Core2Duo 2.4GHz PC as my main studio machine for years. It still grafts and can handle big projects. I did a massive contemporary jazz album with it a few years back at 88.2 so I promise, your i5 is more than sufficient.

2. Your system drive is too big. Even if it's partitioned there's still one head there doing all the work. This will definitely slow down your system and cause problems ESPECIALLY at high sample rates. It's best to have a smaller, faster system drive (like an 80GB SSD or a Raptor drive) and to use your large 1TB HDD as the recording drive. Having a further drive to store your VSTi data/samples can also help speed things up. I personally feel this is most likely the cause of your system slow down.

3. 32-bit is not the issue here. It would be if you had a severely out-dated computer, perhaps. It was said earlier by someone that it is "not supported" and while that is true of pretty much all interfaces, it is not directly related to the interface. 32-bit floating point is the INTERNAL PRECISION (something very different) of the software you are using. No interface supports 32-bit FP so that point is moot. Therefore all the audio passing through your interface will be 24-bit. A 32-bit floating point Cubase Project can support any bit depth within itself. It is merely the internal processing that gets applied at 32-bit. Granted, when recording at 32-bit the incoming 24-bit files get written to 32-bit files, but that shouldn't put that much strain on your computer, especially if you're running an i5 with plenty of RAM. There is nothing but zeros beyond the least significant bit of the incoming 24-bit audio so the files still are, for all intents and purposes, 24-bit.

4. If your interface/DAW supports direct monitoring, then use that in conjunction with a higher buffer setting to relieve strain on the processor. Googling the issue now confirms the Scarlet 2i2 does support direct monitoring. This allows you to monitor the input directly while choosing a higher buffer setting. Note that you can't use plugins with this setting however. You can find the setting (a check box) in Device Setup.

5. Lastly, read this article on the Focusrite Answerbase:

http://www.focusrite.com/answerbase/en/article.php?id=1071

Hope that helps.

Cheers ?

symbolofmylife

Mo Facta wrote: I would just like to summarize some things I picked up from reading this thread.

1. You computer is plenty powerful so it's not the PC. I can almost guarantee that 100%. I had a Core2Duo 2.4GHz PC as my main studio machine for years. It still grafts and can handle big projects. I did a massive contemporary jazz album with it a few years back at 88.2 so I promise, your i5 is more than sufficient.

2. Your system drive is too big. Even if it's partitioned there's still one head there doing all the work. This will definitely slow down your system and cause problems ESPECIALLY at high sample rates. It's best to have a smaller, faster system drive (like an 80GB SSD or a Raptor drive) and to use your large 1TB HDD as the recording drive. Having a further drive to store your VSTi data/samples can also help speed things up. I personally feel this is most likely the cause of your system slow down.

3. 32-bit is not the issue here. It would be if you had a severely out-dated computer, perhaps. It was said earlier by someone that it is "not supported" and while that is true of pretty much all interfaces, it is not directly related to the interface. 32-bit floating point is the INTERNAL PRECISION (something very different) of the software you are using. No interface supports 32-bit FP so that point is moot. Therefore all the audio passing through your interface will be 24-bit. A 32-bit floating point Cubase Project can support any bit depth within itself. It is merely the internal processing that gets applied at 32-bit. Granted, when recording at 32-bit the incoming 24-bit files get written to 32-bit files, but that shouldn't put that much strain on your computer, especially if you're running an i5 with plenty of RAM. There is nothing but zeros beyond the least significant bit of the incoming 24-bit audio so the files still are, for all intents and purposes, 24-bit.

4. If your interface/DAW supports direct monitoring, then use that in conjunction with a higher buffer setting to relieve strain on the processor. Googling the issue now confirms the Scarlet 2i2 does support direct monitoring. This allows you to monitor the input directly while choosing a higher buffer setting. Note that you can't use plugins with this setting however. You can find the setting (a check box) in Device Setup.

5. Lastly, read this article on the Focusrite Answerbase:

http://www.focusrite.com/answerbase/en/article.php?id=1071

Hope that helps.

Cheers ?

Thanks! The issue appears to have been that the drivers included with the 2i2 needed to be updated. Once I did that...no issues....zero latency....all good!