Gold clips selling point is essentially the 'compression' of the Lavery converters. Essentially moving samples up by one bit - depending on your settings - if the sample is below -12 dbfs.. there is a bit more under the hood, but you can generally find the papers that would recreate this effect with ease. I don't know if it's all that different from other processors. On the topic of sample rates, I believe there are some videos on RUclips about stretching, though there are definitely papers on the topic. In short, yes a higher sample rate does allow for greater time stretching before artifacts occur, but it is a bit more complicated. ADAA is essentially applying anti-derivative of a non-linear function and then using discrete time differentiation to create the final signal with less aliasing artifacts. So oversampling can be thought of as a brute force method, while ADAA might be a bit more elegant. Edit: I should mention that there is a good resource for some of the mathematics and technical stuff.. Julius O. Smith has a website with his books that (while hard to navigate) has a wealth of information for DSP.
To each their own for sure. I had a ton of clipping options when Gold Clip came out... Still do. What sold me on Gold Clip was the Gold knob. Finding the sweet spot between it, the input slider into the clipper plus rolling off a little bit of highs if necessary with the Alchemy knob just worked for me. I still have a place for my other clippers and use them all the time. Peace and love to y'all
i did the test again with multiple different sounds and songs and flacs from random albums. i do not think i could do better than guessing in a blind test if multiple sounds are playing. i would have slightly better odds if its a single sound. it was so subtle it makes me feel like it's not something im going to be concerned about anymore
Thank you for your dedication to educating, informing and sharing your thoughts and techniques!! True value and one of the most useful audio channels if you love the art of mixing and mastering.
I have tried Gold Clip and compared it to my other clippers /saturators such as Standard Clip, Newfangled Saturate, JST Clip, izotope maximizer etc... I much prefer standard clip over gold clip due to its sizzly high end as well as maintaining transient punch. I usually set to "soft clip pro" and move the slider to around 10-25% depending on the mix and get very good results on the master bus. there are some projects where I even have it pushed to +8dB and still maintain clarity. With Gold clip I noticed that it reduces "punch" and the high end is lacking. I have a feeling that behind the algorithm it has some sort of high pass filter before feeding it to a clipper. Im going to stick to my Standard Clip. btw love your videos keep it up
Oversampling can get complicated. If youre working with a chain of nonlinear processors - oversampling each and every processor can create problems, especially if they dont use linear phase filters - and even still. The cycles of upsampling, filtering, downsampling over and over can create issues. Reaper offers an elegant solution with FX Chain oversampling. As of right now a more open solution is needed. White Sea has a great video on this
The reason to use higher levels of oversampling is if you are using many plug ins that are all introducing aliasing distortion. For a mastering session you are not going to be using a large amount of plugins with aliasing distortion anyway so 192k is plenty. Its more helpful for production in certain genres, you may have a lot of different plugins each adding its own distortion and they add up, so reducing the distortion level of each one even further can help.
Newfangled Saturate for the mixbus and Standard Clip for buses remains my favs. Gold Clip definitely has a sound, but I feel like it craps out earlier than Saturate for example in turn for giving more colour. If I want colour, I could just use saturation ahead of Saturate. ❤
@@xerixm5314 listen to it... Put it on the mixbus at the start. Then A/B with material that's actually stereo. You'll see that it clips mids and sides independently and shrinks it. I've tested this pretty extensively. Now I kinda just look at it like an SSL compressor, which accurate emulations of it ALSO shrink the stereo field
I tested Gold Clip for 30 days. IMO, the one feature in Gold Clip that sets it apart is the Gold feature which is not part of the clipping algorithm but a form of expansion. I was able to dup the gold feature with Sculpt. I decided not to spend my $249 on Gold Clip.
I've actually been using Flatline 2 for most of my clipping recently. I like the flexibility of the hybrid section and it's quick for me to get a nice sound. That said after watching your tutorial on Standard Clip I'll definitely be experimenting with it, especially on masters for more aggressive styles of music, or where I need more control. I also do a lot of work on folk and singer songwriter type stuff, which still needs a pop sheen but not as much of a hard clipping sound. I tried out Gold Clip for the Lavery sound, but didn't love it. What I actually fell in love with for the classic "clipping out of the DAC" sound was Acustica ASH. It has a ton of modeled clipping circuits and you can really cycle through and find a great sound (including that Lavery sound) and it's quite configurable (although not as deep as Standard Clip). That being said, it uses a lot of resources so you gotta be careful with it, and it definitely has a sound, it's not like a clean sterile clipper. But for me it was definitely a worthwhile purchase. I tend to oversample at 4x while I'm mastering and then just flip it up to 8x when I print.
I use higher oversampling when prepping stems sometimes its good to clip early on especially with percussive sounds, but if you clip, add compression/eq, and clip again the aliasing will start adding up.
I actually felt the same way you did about Gold Clip - it is a cool plugin, just not one I wanted to spend the money on. For all the oversampling stuff - I actually think more that you stated is "necessary". There have been occasions when I could hear it blind, though I admit that they're pathological special cases. When I was doing those tests, I was also listening for artifacts of the filters. As long as the oversampling is implemented well, I can't hear them. That's honstly the big difference between hard clippers - the oversampling performance. My computer can handle quite a lot of it in mastering sessions, so I use plugins that don't cause artifacts from the oversampling itself and go "a bit" overboard. It's an extension of the "do no harm" aspect of mastering. IMHO, of course. YMMV. Etc.. And, no, I'm not talking about 256x. That's silly. I fully support the idea of making videos responding to questions/comments.
An intersting fact about blue light. Humans have a bunch of diferant photosensitive cells in the back of the eye (it's how we see colours), a certain wavelength of blue light, the same tone as the sky, will cause the brain to releace certain cemicals that stimulate awakeness (this is why we feel more awake at day, even if we have a backwards sleeping pattern, and one of the reasons going outside wakes us up more). Computor screens emit a butt ton of this freqency of light (this is why night mode is a thing), and can either keep you up for a few hours after looking at them for long periods of time, or make you really tired after very long sessions as you get worn out from the constant stimulation of staring at the screen all day. This is the actual science behind where all them stupid conspiracies came from about blue light being harmful, which is ofc untrue. Blocking this freqency of light will help with exhaustion if looking at a screen all day, just the same as using night mode helps you get to sleep easier. 👍
For me there is a case for such a high oversampling but is sound design rather than mixing or mastering, i sometimes do some hard bass synth sounds driving clippers super hard with basic shapes For example using just two sine waves, one sub and one super high frequency and this is simply aliasing hell Even so i really never went higher than 32x, tried 64 but i couldn't hear the difference in that case 🤷🏻 Love ur videos btw ♥️
Having both Standard Clip and Gold Clip, I use Gold Clip when mastering and Standard Clip on individual drums and busses. I could easily use Standard Clip when mastering too, but the Gold and Alchemy functions made me replace Standard Clip. Not a shill, and I may not be 'right' with this thought process, but just giving another opinion.
The Gold Clip didn't win out against even free clippers for me, total waste of money. ASH, Knock Clipper & the Prism ADC Clipper from AnalogXAI are the best ITB IMO
This is offtopic from a mastering perspective, but i find it funny that aliasing is stigmatized as an objectively bad thing, while generations of producers shaped today's music with those old AKAI and MPC samplers that alias so much, it became a signature sound. People are still looking for the best plugins for sampler-aliasing, so they can emulate that grungy sound. So just playing the devil's advocate here, and saying: aliasing can be awesome!! (yeah, maybe not for the 2bus :P )
Look, ma, I'm famous! But seriously, thanks for taking the time to explain that out. I'm on the path to becoming a mastering engineer, and that's a very handy trick to know for checking lossy audio.
I always thought ali-izing was an aussie thing. Probably because you are the only ausie i hear use that word. Couldve fooled me by passing it off as an accent easy! 😂
Thanks for all your awesome videos and help Nick, I’ve learnt so much of you, Bloody legend mate. What are your experiences with over sampling clippers increasing peak level compared to no oversampling. I used to use 4x on standard clip then saw warp academy’s video and tried no oversampling and realised I honestly couldn’t hear the Ailiasing on things I was mixing/ mastering. I only clip peaks and not the body of the sound, same as you I believe. Using vsx for monitoring - I’m assuming this is good enough to hear subtle Ailiasing? Also can’t wait for your more in depth vca vs buss video. Thanks mate
A question not related to clippers but I was wondering as a professional do you keep a backup of all projects you mix or master and for how long would you keep them? sometimes I get asked for different versions of mixes I did years ago and sometimes I don't have them any more. I guess there needs to be an agreement at the start that I will keep the files for X amount of time
Re: can anyone tell whether you’re using 1, 4 or 16 oversampling? I’d say just like everything in mixing/mastering, it’s accumulative. If you ran all your fx in your mastering chain (or mix) at 1 time oversampling the aliasing would add up to a noticeable point at some stage. Just like saturating everything in a mix can add up to a shitshow of clarity. Perhaps you can or you can’t tell on just one fx unit/plugin, but used on several you definitely can if your ears are trained to fine details. Also the fact that aliasing is confirmed with metering tools (plugin doctor for example), it should be enough to know that ears aren’t alway the best or only detection device. Sometimes we need visual metering (especially when it’s a case of accumulative fx units/pluins), in order to achieve the utmost Sonic integrity.
haven't tried the gold clip because I don't think I really need another clipper 🤷♂️ I mix into a limiter and compressor, by the time I master I'm clipping and adding another limiter. by then I'm at like -5lufs or so depending on the track so idk... maybe I'm try the demo...
You reading my comment was humbling, I type with the assumption my unfinished thoughts would be understood, makes for a nice word salad. You don’t need a recording test. You can take any vocal maybe raping and singing, and import to a session at 96k and use something like vocal blender as a multimono insert and put one side + an octave and the other - an octave. Commit to track while leaving the original alone and import data to a new session and sample rate with the same settings and vocal stem. Just that alone should raise some eyebrows. These might be small to people but then they’re willing to pay up the a🍑as for converters, clocks, gear that make the most subtle difference, make it make sense lol. Shit stacks, are you enjoying and trying to sell me a shit sandwich, see, that’s were you come in offering Italian subs😊 but be careful and not get delusional in thinking your shit don’t stank. I Like the video, and QA.
@americatunedright1211 IS ONE OF THE BEST IVE HEARD IN A WHILE… HIS ATTENTION TO THE DETAILS & LOVE FOR THE ART OF ENGINEERING IS BY FAR ADMIRABLE…!!!! 🫡💯👑
There is no oversampling, it's over as opposed to what, under or normal sampling? It's just sampling rate which means resolution. Do we need high resolution music? We don't. Maybe we want it in some cases, maybe we don't, it's not necessary. But it's "trendy". There are even music genres based on low resolution. OK, lets say you uploaded this video in 720p or 1080p instead of 2160 and there is no visible indication about that. Would anyone care? Would anyone complain? Would your video be worse, or the content different? Maybe you would not appear crispy clear, but that's not the point, is it? You can have an awesome image in 512x512 pixels, as you can have in 3840x2160. The content of the image is more important than the resolution. Also a distorted image is all about an artistic take, a not distorted image is just a simple picture with no filters and no processing. So yes, we can produce high-res music, but do we have to? Some of my beats sound better with no "oversampling" for the simple fact that the audible distortion creates a desirable effect which makes you feel something different. We use so many effects to create distortions, you never make music by taking sterile sounds and mangling them together, you always distort and distort again your samples to make them fit.
Your comment is misguided, as the 'resolution' analogy is more suited to the process of recording. Yes, when recording 44.1khz is plenty. But when applying DSP, in this case a form of non-linear distortion, oversampling creates a more realistic analogue to electrical circuit distortion. While there are genres where aliasing distortion is sought after, it's usually done so during the process of 'recording' - or more specifically sampling. Sometimes, people will choose to *recreate* this effect in their mix. The reflection of created frequency information back from nyquist is not desirable in cases where it is not being used as a creative effect. In your analogy it's not the resolution we are concerned about, but instead the haloing we see in transition segments of a photo. Your conclusion would be like having every photo, regardless of whether it was meant to appear lossy or not, becoming lossy during the final stages of color correction. The point of mastering is to prepare a record for final release without noticeably changing the intention of the music.
@@SinclairSound I don't think you got my analogy. For example, I take hi-res selfie, but its high-res makes some things noticeable that you normally wouldn't notice, such as a wrinkle, or a pimple, or I just don't like how this pic really represents reality, so I apply a couple of filters and adjustments, gone are the wrinkles and blurred are the pimples, everything looks nicer and I look beautiful, which I am not. I can turn my eyes blue and stuff, I can even downscale it a lot so all those unwanted details are gone and now I can post it and get hundreds of likes from the ladies.
@@konstantinos777 again, your photo is taken at a resolution. Then you want to make an adjustment, a series of algorithms allows you to make this adjustment. You receive your finished product to your liking. Over sampling a clipper would be like scaling up your photo with an interpolator, so your filters don't cause as many noticeable artifacts. Then the photo is simply reduced back to the resolution you first took it at. As your audio is sampled back to your original sample rate once the process has been applied.
@@SinclairSound Yes. so my whole point is that oversampling a clipper is something you choose to do or not depending on your material and what you want to do with it. Sometimes I "over" sample, sometimes I don't, it depends on whether I get the sound I want. At the final limiter on a mastering session, I usually go for 8x, there is no point going higher (and there's no higher option on this limiter anyway). An analogy would be like, there is a visible difference from 480p to 720p or 1080p, but from 1080p to 1440p it's harder to tell and doesn't make a big difference. Now, when I am making music and I am in a creative mode, I am not going to let things like sample rates and bit-depths get in my way, otherwise all the momentum is gone.
![Lethal Company Music Video 🎵 "Follow The Orders" [VERSION A]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QeooZB4Z7RA/mqdefault.jpg)
Gold clips selling point is essentially the 'compression' of the Lavery converters. Essentially moving samples up by one bit - depending on your settings - if the sample is below -12 dbfs.. there is a bit more under the hood, but you can generally find the papers that would recreate this effect with ease. I don't know if it's all that different from other processors.
On the topic of sample rates, I believe there are some videos on RUclips about stretching, though there are definitely papers on the topic. In short, yes a higher sample rate does allow for greater time stretching before artifacts occur, but it is a bit more complicated.
ADAA is essentially applying anti-derivative of a non-linear function and then using discrete time differentiation to create the final signal with less aliasing artifacts. So oversampling can be thought of as a brute force method, while ADAA might be a bit more elegant.
Edit: I should mention that there is a good resource for some of the mathematics and technical stuff.. Julius O. Smith has a website with his books that (while hard to navigate) has a wealth of information for DSP.
damn
I have downloaded the AES papers and medium article on the topic; I'll be researching this further!
Thanks as well for sharing your input too!
What paper are we talking about here. Can you share ?
To each their own for sure. I had a ton of clipping options when Gold Clip came out... Still do. What sold me on Gold Clip was the Gold knob. Finding the sweet spot between it, the input slider into the clipper plus rolling off a little bit of highs if necessary with the Alchemy knob just worked for me. I still have a place for my other clippers and use them all the time. Peace and love to y'all
i did the test again with multiple different sounds and songs and flacs from random albums. i do not think i could do better than guessing in a blind test if multiple sounds are playing. i would have slightly better odds if its a single sound. it was so subtle it makes me feel like it's not something im going to be concerned about anymore
Videos like this one makes you feel like a part of the community. Thumbs up for responding to each comment!
Thanks man! I will try to get more of these out over time!
Thank you for your dedication to educating, informing and sharing your thoughts and techniques!! True value and one of the most useful audio channels if you love the art of mixing and mastering.
Kclip on crisp mode beats everything out there! Either its bass heavy or very sharp transient, it will manage them easily and pleasantly!!!
I didn't know Spencer Sotelo was a great mastering engineer
mhh naah ...
I have tried Gold Clip and compared it to my other clippers /saturators such as Standard Clip, Newfangled Saturate, JST Clip, izotope maximizer etc...
I much prefer standard clip over gold clip due to its sizzly high end as well as maintaining transient punch. I usually set to "soft clip pro" and move the slider to around 10-25% depending on the mix and get very good results on the master bus. there are some projects where I even have it pushed to +8dB and still maintain clarity.
With Gold clip I noticed that it reduces "punch" and the high end is lacking. I have a feeling that behind the algorithm it has some sort of high pass filter before feeding it to a clipper.
Im going to stick to my Standard Clip.
btw love your videos keep it up
Oversampling can get complicated. If youre working with a chain of nonlinear processors - oversampling each and every processor can create problems, especially if they dont use linear phase filters - and even still. The cycles of upsampling, filtering, downsampling over and over can create issues. Reaper offers an elegant solution with FX Chain oversampling. As of right now a more open solution is needed. White Sea has a great video on this
The reason to use higher levels of oversampling is if you are using many plug ins that are all introducing aliasing distortion. For a mastering session you are not going to be using a large amount of plugins with aliasing distortion anyway so 192k is plenty. Its more helpful for production in certain genres, you may have a lot of different plugins each adding its own distortion and they add up, so reducing the distortion level of each one even further can help.
Newfangled Saturate for the mixbus and Standard Clip for buses remains my favs. Gold Clip definitely has a sound, but I feel like it craps out earlier than Saturate for example in turn for giving more colour. If I want colour, I could just use saturation ahead of Saturate. ❤
i approve I use newfangled saturate & gold clip on my master bus!
Saturate shrinks the stereo field!!!
@django3108 not at all man if anything it enhances it!
@@xerixm5314 listen to it... Put it on the mixbus at the start. Then A/B with material that's actually stereo. You'll see that it clips mids and sides independently and shrinks it. I've tested this pretty extensively. Now I kinda just look at it like an SSL compressor, which accurate emulations of it ALSO shrink the stereo field
@django3108 I have man I make metal music and I saturate and clip my master bus to -4LUFS lmao and work fine for me
Will always appreciate your honest and objective outlook on things 🙏🏼
I tested Gold Clip for 30 days. IMO, the one feature in Gold Clip that sets it apart is the Gold feature which is not part of the clipping algorithm but a form of expansion. I was able to dup the gold feature with Sculpt.
I decided not to spend my $249 on Gold Clip.
I've actually been using Flatline 2 for most of my clipping recently. I like the flexibility of the hybrid section and it's quick for me to get a nice sound. That said after watching your tutorial on Standard Clip I'll definitely be experimenting with it, especially on masters for more aggressive styles of music, or where I need more control.
I also do a lot of work on folk and singer songwriter type stuff, which still needs a pop sheen but not as much of a hard clipping sound. I tried out Gold Clip for the Lavery sound, but didn't love it. What I actually fell in love with for the classic "clipping out of the DAC" sound was Acustica ASH. It has a ton of modeled clipping circuits and you can really cycle through and find a great sound (including that Lavery sound) and it's quite configurable (although not as deep as Standard Clip). That being said, it uses a lot of resources so you gotta be careful with it, and it definitely has a sound, it's not like a clean sterile clipper. But for me it was definitely a worthwhile purchase.
I tend to oversample at 4x while I'm mastering and then just flip it up to 8x when I print.
I use higher oversampling when prepping stems sometimes its good to clip early on especially with percussive sounds, but if you clip, add compression/eq, and clip again the aliasing will start adding up.
I actually felt the same way you did about Gold Clip - it is a cool plugin, just not one I wanted to spend the money on.
For all the oversampling stuff - I actually think more that you stated is "necessary". There have been occasions when I could hear it blind, though I admit that they're pathological special cases. When I was doing those tests, I was also listening for artifacts of the filters. As long as the oversampling is implemented well, I can't hear them. That's honstly the big difference between hard clippers - the oversampling performance. My computer can handle quite a lot of it in mastering sessions, so I use plugins that don't cause artifacts from the oversampling itself and go "a bit" overboard. It's an extension of the "do no harm" aspect of mastering. IMHO, of course. YMMV. Etc.. And, no, I'm not talking about 256x. That's silly.
I fully support the idea of making videos responding to questions/comments.
I love the GUI of Goldclip but Standard Clip can do the same sound. Tested both. Kept using Standard Clip.
An intersting fact about blue light. Humans have a bunch of diferant photosensitive cells in the back of the eye (it's how we see colours), a certain wavelength of blue light, the same tone as the sky, will cause the brain to releace certain cemicals that stimulate awakeness (this is why we feel more awake at day, even if we have a backwards sleeping pattern, and one of the reasons going outside wakes us up more).
Computor screens emit a butt ton of this freqency of light (this is why night mode is a thing), and can either keep you up for a few hours after looking at them for long periods of time, or make you really tired after very long sessions as you get worn out from the constant stimulation of staring at the screen all day. This is the actual science behind where all them stupid conspiracies came from about blue light being harmful, which is ofc untrue.
Blocking this freqency of light will help with exhaustion if looking at a screen all day, just the same as using night mode helps you get to sleep easier. 👍
Lmao at the response to the pronunciation comment 😂. It’s 100% clear what you’re on about and incredibly informative. Nice work
There was a hit TV show in the early 2000's starring Jennifer Garner. It was called "Alias".
came for the clickbait, stayed for the massive amount of helpful information . usually its the other way around :P
For me there is a case for such a high oversampling but is sound design rather than mixing or mastering, i sometimes do some hard bass synth sounds driving clippers super hard with basic shapes
For example using just two sine waves, one sub and one super high frequency and this is simply aliasing hell
Even so i really never went higher than 32x, tried 64 but i couldn't hear the difference in that case 🤷🏻
Love ur videos btw ♥️
Wonderful, that’s a great share! Thanks for the input!
Having both Standard Clip and Gold Clip, I use Gold Clip when mastering and Standard Clip on individual drums and busses. I could easily use Standard Clip when mastering too, but the Gold and Alchemy functions made me replace Standard Clip. Not a shill, and I may not be 'right' with this thought process, but just giving another opinion.
The Gold Clip didn't win out against even free clippers for me, total waste of money. ASH, Knock Clipper & the Prism ADC Clipper from AnalogXAI are the best ITB IMO
Free clip is also a great option
Newfangled Saturate & Boz Big Clipper (NOT Big Clipper 2) >>>> all of these
@django3108 they're both good. I bought the Boz Big Clipper but I did multiple blind shootouts and the ones I mentioned killed every other option
This is offtopic from a mastering perspective, but i find it funny that aliasing is stigmatized as an objectively bad thing, while generations of producers shaped today's music with those old AKAI and MPC samplers that alias so much, it became a signature sound. People are still looking for the best plugins for sampler-aliasing, so they can emulate that grungy sound.
So just playing the devil's advocate here, and saying: aliasing can be awesome!!
(yeah, maybe not for the 2bus :P )
Would love to hear some blind StandardClip vs Gold Clip shootout examples to determine the objective effect of each on a Master.
Was expecting a shootout of them to be honest..
Peak snake oil
The new Three Body Technology compressor uses this ADAA technology
Look, ma, I'm famous!
But seriously, thanks for taking the time to explain that out. I'm on the path to becoming a mastering engineer, and that's a very handy trick to know for checking lossy audio.
I always thought ali-izing was an aussie thing. Probably because you are the only ausie i hear use that word. Couldve fooled me by passing it off as an accent easy! 😂
Thanks for all your awesome videos and help Nick, I’ve learnt so much of you, Bloody legend mate.
What are your experiences with over sampling clippers increasing peak level compared to no oversampling. I used to use 4x on standard clip then saw warp academy’s video and tried no oversampling and realised I honestly couldn’t hear the Ailiasing on things I was mixing/ mastering. I only clip peaks and not the body of the sound, same as you I believe. Using vsx for monitoring - I’m assuming this is good enough to hear subtle Ailiasing? Also can’t wait for your more in depth vca vs buss video. Thanks mate
A question not related to clippers but I was wondering as a professional do you keep a backup of all projects you mix or master and for how long would you keep them? sometimes I get asked for different versions of mixes I did years ago and sometimes I don't have them any more. I guess there needs to be an agreement at the start that I will keep the files for X amount of time
Re: can anyone tell whether you’re using 1, 4 or 16 oversampling? I’d say just like everything in mixing/mastering, it’s accumulative. If you ran all your fx in your mastering chain (or mix) at 1 time oversampling the aliasing would add up to a noticeable point at some stage. Just like saturating everything in a mix can add up to a shitshow of clarity. Perhaps you can or you can’t tell on just one fx unit/plugin, but used on several you definitely can if your ears are trained to fine details. Also the fact that aliasing is confirmed with metering tools (plugin doctor for example), it should be enough to know that ears aren’t alway the best or only detection device. Sometimes we need visual metering (especially when it’s a case of accumulative fx units/pluins), in order to achieve the utmost Sonic integrity.
haven't tried the gold clip because I don't think I really need another clipper 🤷♂️ I mix into a limiter and compressor, by the time I master I'm clipping and adding another limiter. by then I'm at like -5lufs or so depending on the track so idk... maybe I'm try the demo...
OVC-128 Clipper is the real deal
For real, running at an internal sample rate of 5.6 MHz if some wild stuff
"even if I didn't receive Gold Clip for free I would have bought it" 😂🤣😂🤣
My channels stop playing when I enter the plugin
We need you to write a book
Good info 👍🏿
You reading my comment was humbling, I type with the assumption my unfinished thoughts would be understood, makes for a nice word salad.
You don’t need a recording test. You can take any vocal maybe raping and singing, and import to a session at 96k and use something like vocal blender as a multimono insert and put one side + an octave and the other - an octave. Commit to track while leaving the original alone and import data to a new session and sample rate with the same settings and vocal stem. Just that alone should raise some eyebrows. These might be small to people but then they’re willing to pay up the a🍑as for converters, clocks, gear that make the most subtle difference, make it make sense lol. Shit stacks, are you enjoying and trying to sell me a shit sandwich, see, that’s were you come in offering Italian subs😊 but be careful and not get delusional in thinking your shit don’t stank. I Like the video, and QA.
@americatunedright1211 IS ONE OF THE BEST IVE HEARD IN A WHILE… HIS ATTENTION TO THE DETAILS & LOVE FOR THE ART OF ENGINEERING IS BY FAR ADMIRABLE…!!!! 🫡💯👑
@@WerxOfWisdom713 yo! Appreciate your words brother 🙏. You might want to subscribe to this dude, I know you’ll learn plenty from him.
Kazrog KClip
I command you to try Acustica Audio ASH Ultra clipper ! Just kidding :p Nothing beats a proven workflow. I really love your channel man, GOLD !
There is no oversampling, it's over as opposed to what, under or normal sampling? It's just sampling rate which means resolution.
Do we need high resolution music? We don't. Maybe we want it in some cases, maybe we don't, it's not necessary. But it's "trendy". There are even music genres based on low resolution.
OK, lets say you uploaded this video in 720p or 1080p instead of 2160 and there is no visible indication about that. Would anyone care? Would anyone complain? Would your video be worse, or the content different? Maybe you would not appear crispy clear, but that's not the point, is it? You can have an awesome image in 512x512 pixels, as you can have in 3840x2160. The content of the image is more important than the resolution. Also a distorted image is all about an artistic take, a not distorted image is just a simple picture with no filters and no processing.
So yes, we can produce high-res music, but do we have to? Some of my beats sound better with no "oversampling" for the simple fact that the audible distortion creates a desirable effect which makes you feel something different. We use so many effects to create distortions, you never make music by taking sterile sounds and mangling them together, you always distort and distort again your samples to make them fit.
Your comment is misguided, as the 'resolution' analogy is more suited to the process of recording. Yes, when recording 44.1khz is plenty. But when applying DSP, in this case a form of non-linear distortion, oversampling creates a more realistic analogue to electrical circuit distortion. While there are genres where aliasing distortion is sought after, it's usually done so during the process of 'recording' - or more specifically sampling. Sometimes, people will choose to *recreate* this effect in their mix.
The reflection of created frequency information back from nyquist is not desirable in cases where it is not being used as a creative effect.
In your analogy it's not the resolution we are concerned about, but instead the haloing we see in transition segments of a photo.
Your conclusion would be like having every photo, regardless of whether it was meant to appear lossy or not, becoming lossy during the final stages of color correction. The point of mastering is to prepare a record for final release without noticeably changing the intention of the music.
@@SinclairSound I don't think you got my analogy. For example, I take hi-res selfie, but its high-res makes some things noticeable that you normally wouldn't notice, such as a wrinkle, or a pimple, or I just don't like how this pic really represents reality, so I apply a couple of filters and adjustments, gone are the wrinkles and blurred are the pimples, everything looks nicer and I look beautiful, which I am not. I can turn my eyes blue and stuff, I can even downscale it a lot so all those unwanted details are gone and now I can post it and get hundreds of likes from the ladies.
@@konstantinos777 again, your photo is taken at a resolution. Then you want to make an adjustment, a series of algorithms allows you to make this adjustment. You receive your finished product to your liking.
Over sampling a clipper would be like scaling up your photo with an interpolator, so your filters don't cause as many noticeable artifacts. Then the photo is simply reduced back to the resolution you first took it at. As your audio is sampled back to your original sample rate once the process has been applied.
@@SinclairSound Yes. so my whole point is that oversampling a clipper is something you choose to do or not depending on your material and what you want to do with it. Sometimes I "over" sample, sometimes I don't, it depends on whether I get the sound I want. At the final limiter on a mastering session, I usually go for 8x, there is no point going higher (and there's no higher option on this limiter anyway). An analogy would be like, there is a visible difference from 480p to 720p or 1080p, but from 1080p to 1440p it's harder to tell and doesn't make a big difference.
Now, when I am making music and I am in a creative mode, I am not going to let things like sample rates and bit-depths get in my way, otherwise all the momentum is gone.
I bought Gold and Orange without crying about it.
cool story bro
Ok
F.lux free software for filtering blue light for pc/mac