how do I know at which sample rate my plugins run?

[RecordingMaster]

My question basically stems from the whole 44.1k vs 96k debate.

Theory #1 (which i am cool with and wish to adhere to):
Some people say the difference between a raw 44.1k recorded track vs the same raw 96k recorded track is negligible and would require superhuman hearing to tell the difference. The extra cpu power needed and drive space taken for 96 k, makes recording at 44.1k the obvious smarter choice.

Theory #2 (which is why i still scratch my head in wondering which is better):
Some people say that certain plugins perform better at a higher sample rate. Sure some plugins have oversampling on/off functions, but not too many of mine, other than a few T Racks singles plugins.

So what i am wondering is, how can I check at which sample rate my plugins were designed to operate at or what sample rate they expect to be fed in order to work at their fullest potential? I use Pro Tools 9 and of course, a few of the stock plugins are spinkled in here and there for more utilitarian "character-free" tasks, if you will. Then I have collected a few URS plugins, a few waves plugins, a few Slate plugins (VCC and VTM being a huge part of my workflow), a few of IK Multimedia T Racks plugins anda few softube plugins. You can find one or more plugins from each of those manufacturers on any given session of mine.

I'm about to record an entire album's worth of material for a new client and wanted to take the simplest approach possible for everything that will save me time mixing and tracking (like tracking with fewer mics and get a BETTER sound rather than trying to be super fancy with 10 mics on a guitar cab and 40 tracks of drums, etc), save me cpu resources, save me drive space, etc. I was thinking..."Yep 44.1 will be the sample rate for this album. It'll use less space and give me less cpu headaches while mixing, plus save me lots of drive space". But then there's the whole "Well damn it I forgot about plugin performance. If the plugins I am used to working with [which I have done most of my mixes at 96k] perform a certain way and I have come to expect that, will I suddenly be degrading their performance if I am using them in a 44.1k session (which was also tracked that way)?"

The argument is "well, in the right hands, a good mix will be a good mix no matter what friggen sample rate was". But the thing here is, it's in the same hands, the same gear, same plugins, etc. It's all me mixing, whether it be at 44.1 or 96k, and still my same ears. So I wonder if my lower sample rate i plan to use will fight against what I have come to expect from my plugins...and if it will, I wonder which plugins in particular those will be that perform so much more poorly (to where it's noticeable), so i won't use them as much in these mixes. I know what you'd all say...do a listening test. But the thing is, I have no true way of tracking the exact same thing at different sample rates and trying out a specific plugin in two different sessions with different sample rates.

Anyways, I'm sure I'm overthinking it (as always), but there must be SOME sort of way in gauging (or at least making an educated guess) which of my plugins may/may not do as well at 44.1.

 

[miroslav]

You've given this a lot of thought.

OK...I'll help with one thing, the rest you can research on your own.

Sample Rate Support | Waves

(That was easy)

Maybe I'm missing something....but AFAIK, your plugs perform at whatever rate your project is set at.
It comes down to what's the highest rates a given plug can perform at....and that's what the Waves list is showing.
AFA how does a given plug sound on a project at 44.1 VS 96.....mmmmmmm, I think your overall project rate will have a bigger impact than just the plugs, unless you are using tons of plugs to get/shape a sound.
IOW....I wouldn't worry about my project recording rate soley on which rate I want my plugs to run at...or that I would have any idea which plugs I would use on a given project in advance.

OK...here's a couple of more links.....enjoy!

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/418022-lets-do-ultimate-plugin-analysis-thread.html

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/716467-plug-ins-sample-rate.html

 

[gecko zzed]

I'm sure I'm overthinking it

That was my thought too.

I like your idea of keeping things as simple as possible. That's a good way of reducing headaches and minimising the risk of things going wrong. I think you can safely exclude how plugins operate.

 

[Mo Facta]

Some plugins oversample internally, if I'm not mistaken. Some even have an internal precision higher than the project bit rate. There has been some discussion by people like Bob Ohlsson on the lack of dithering at the output of most plugins that do this.

Cheers

 

[mjbphotos]

I wouldn't think the sample rate would really make a difference in how any particular plugin would sound in the mix.

Wait a minute - you're NOT going to use 10 mics (or mikes) on each guitar cabinet? What are you thinking, man?

 

[RecordingMaster]

You've given this a lot of thought.

OK...I'll help with one thing, the rest you can research on your own.

Sample Rate Support | Waves

(That was easy)

Maybe I'm missing something....but AFAIK, your plugs perform at whatever rate your project is set at.
It comes down to what's the highest rates a given plug can perform at....and that's what the Waves list is showing.
AFA how does a given plug sound on a project at 44.1 VS 96.....mmmmmmm, I think your overall project rate will have a bigger impact than just the plugs, unless you are using tons of plugs to get/shape a sound.
IOW....I wouldn't worry about my project recording rate soley on which rate I want my plugs to run at...or that I would have any idea which plugs I would use on a given project in advance.

OK...here's a couple of more links.....enjoy!

Lets do it: The Ultimate Plugin Analysis Thread - Gearslutz.com

Plug-ins and Sample Rate - Gearslutz.com

Thanks Miro. Hey that waves link didn't work but i will just do a google search for it. It's not that I was ignorant or lazy in searching those answers, it's that apparently I didn't know how to word it for google to give me anything of value!

As far as your thinking of "I think your overall project rate will have a bigger impact than just the plugs", that's a controvery in itself but I tend not to beilieve your thoughts as true. Of the research I've done (may which or may not mean jack sh*t), it seems as though the same thing recorded either at 44.1 or 96k is not audibly different to the human ear. Good - that's good!

To clear up my question, I guess I am just concerned of this for example: an eq plugin sounds more detailed, responds better, has better top end clarity (I don't know)! When working on higher sampled recording, where as that very same eq won't be giving you all as much bang for the buck when you are using it at 44.1. So if I have a nice vintage console emulation, nice vintage tape emulation on each track, an eq and compressor on almost every track (or busses or both), then yeah, if all those plugs will sound audibly better on higher 96 sampled stuff, why in the world would I or anyone else want to compromise that by using a lower sample rate session/recording and getting a lower-fi sound from their plugs?

 

[RecordingMaster]

I like your idea of keeping things as simple as possible. That's a good way of reducing headaches and minimising the risk of things going wrong. I think you can safely exclude how plugins operate.

Yep, on past smaller projects I've done the whole dual cab mic thing (plus DI and room mic) and the whole extra-mics-on-drums i never use thing (like the hat mic, outer kick mic, more than 2 room mics, etc), and recorded/mixed at higher sample rates, etc. Sometimes the options were great top have on smaller projects when there's time to be messing with everything and seeing what works best. However on a larger project, especially the paid, non "me" projects, than yeah, simplicity (for the better) is key for a faster and less stressful workflow. Options kill creativity.

And thanks for the extra zen of saying you think i can safely exclude how plugs operate at different sample rates. I'm really hoping this to be true, but it seems the more I read (whatever the hell that's worth) the more I hear that plugins like eq plugins are actually audibly better at higher sample rates.

 

[RecordingMaster]

Some plugins oversample internally, if I'm not mistaken.

Yes, I think that is true. They'd have to, no? Or else the speed at which that given track with the plugin plays back would be slower/faster then the rest of the unprocessed mix.

Some even have an internal precision higher than the project bit rate. There has been some discussion by people like Bob Ohlsson on the lack of dithering at the output of most plugins that do this.

Even if their internal precision is higher than the project sample rate, wouldn't that still be the same argument though? Like, its READY for that higher bit rate for whenever it gets fed that (and performs better), but in a smaller sample rate session it performs a little less than it is capable? Who knows.

 

[miroslav]

Thanks Miro. Hey that waves link didn't work but i will just do a google search for it.

Mmmmm....I just clicked on it and it took me right to the Waves page....here it is again:
Sample Rate Support | Waves


Now...AFA the overall project having more impact than plugs...
...my point is that if your project is 48, your plugs will also run at 48.....so you don't have much choice there.
IOW, if you want to use plugs at higher rates, you would need to run your project at higher rates first.
The plugs that tend to internally oversample.....that's something in addition to.

AFA worrying about recording at 96k just because of the plugs.....meh, I don't see that as really an obvious choice, for the majority of music. I would record at higher rates for the sake of the initial recording, not so much for the plugs.

IOW....the differences between a plug running at 48 VS 96k will be no less subtle than the differences between the initial recording at 48 VS 96k.
There may be very subtle improvement on things like reverb tails....but man, you would need a heck of a monitoring system to notice.

Anyway....I've done my tests/comparisons on recordings, and there isn't enough there for me to worry about.
I use to track at 88.2 for a long time, but now I'm running at 48, and I've not given it much thought since I transitioned over. In my tests, the 88.2/96 showed some very minor imporvement over 44.1...but 48 was too close to call.

There are so many more things that can and do impact the sonic quality of a given recording that deserve serious thought, time and effort....IMO.

 

[gecko zzed]

but it seems the more I read (whatever the hell that's worth) the more I hear that plugins like eq plugins are actually audibly better at higher sample rates.

Possibly. Many such claims are made, but actual proof is scarce. Personally, I remain skeptical. I would heed Miro's words below. The internal operation of plugins is probably the least of your quality worries.

There are so many more things that can and do impact the sonic quality of a given recording that deserve serious thought, time and effort....IMO.

 

[Mo Facta]

Even if their internal precision is higher than the project sample rate, wouldn't that still be the same argument though? Like, its READY for that higher bit rate for whenever it gets fed that (and performs better), but in a smaller sample rate session it performs a little less than it is capable? Who knows.

Yes, but the argument is that most plugins don't implement dithering at the output when truncating to the project bit rate. Bob has said this compounds later to lack of low level detail. I've been trying to find his post on another forum about this but it's like finding a need in a haystack given his post count!

Cheers

 

[RecordingMaster]

Thanks for everyone's replies. While I do agree that there are more important things in the chain that would affect my quality over the sample rate at which my plugins run on my sesions (which of course I also pay attention to), I guess the whole thing stemmed from me wanting to get the most out of my plugins and not sacrifincg tons of potential detail.

But, as I assumed, and many of you have comforted me on, it's probably not THAT big of a deal! I guess I am going to make the switch over to 44.1 for this next project/album for a client and see where it takes me. I'm sure the music will survive and be healthy and strong in the end!

Cheers

 

[Farview]

If certain plugins worked so much better at a specific sample rate, it would be common knowlege what rate that was. If it was a night and day difference that anyone could hear, there would be no question or debate.

If the differences are so small that there is argument about it, then they really don't matter.

As has been said, the tiny quality difference caused by sample rate on specific effects plugins in a mix is going to be unnoticable in the final product, assuming it actually exists.