Combining the power of 2 computers for Reason

Have an urge to learn, or a calling to teach? Want to share some useful Youtube videos? Do it here!
User avatar
bitley
Posts: 1163
Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Location: sweden

Post 15 Aug 2019

30,000-35,000 should probably be enough for pop music etc.

User avatar
Oquasec
Posts: 2403
Joined: 05 Mar 2017

Post 16 Aug 2019

44.1khz and above is enough.
Most hardware does 96khz-192khz maximum maybe higher.
I don't see much of a reason to use 192khz unless you are doing analog timestretching : /
96khz would be more than enough for regular usage.
48khz is perfect for video.
Producer/Sound Designer.
Since Reason loses it's sequencer I don't see the point in skipping.

RobC
Posts: 1123
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

Post 16 Aug 2019

bitley wrote:
15 Aug 2019
30,000-35,000 should probably be enough for pop music etc.
Yep, I found a good article by a well known audio engineer (forgot his name though xD). All in all, that's great news, cause I don't need to care much about sample rate, but high quality.

RobC
Posts: 1123
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

Post 16 Aug 2019

Oquasec wrote:
16 Aug 2019
44.1khz and above is enough.
Most hardware does 96khz-192khz maximum maybe higher.
I don't see much of a reason to use 192khz unless you are doing analog timestretching : /
96khz would be more than enough for regular usage.
48khz is perfect for video.
My max is 192 kHz. The use was more precise automation, compressor; then even Subtractor's FM seemed a lot more flexible. And you're absolutely right about the time stretching, as it's super seamless in Reason. If anything, even if I partly switch to Reaktor, the time stretching in Reason is one of the main features that keeps me with it.
Of course, like I said sampling a synth sound, then re-sampling multiple times, and finally mapping to multiple keys, definitely benefits from higher quality / oversampling. However, it's enough if the computer calculates these internally, and then during playback, simply delivers it to me in 44100 Hz sample rate.

The only thing where I might need higher sample rates, is recording vocals, if I want heavy or completely seamless time stretching.

RobC
Posts: 1123
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

Post 16 Aug 2019

submonsterz wrote:
14 Aug 2019

Reaper been able to do it for a long while .....
That's pretty neat by the way! I liked Reaper's plugins, especially their EQ.

User avatar
sonicbyte
Posts: 231
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Location: Argentina

Post 16 Aug 2019

As Selig said, that's a reality for huge sample libraries usually for orchestra or cinematic style with Vienna Ensemble Pro software via network

User avatar
Oquasec
Posts: 2403
Joined: 05 Mar 2017

Post 17 Aug 2019

Yeah use 48khz unless you're timestretching paul style cuz I don't see the point honestly.
Producer/Sound Designer.
Since Reason loses it's sequencer I don't see the point in skipping.

RobC
Posts: 1123
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

Post 17 Aug 2019

Oquasec wrote:
17 Aug 2019
Yeah use 48khz unless you're timestretching paul style cuz I don't see the point honestly.
Truth be told, I only recorded at 48 tops so far.
It's rather the multiple times rendered/re-sampled synth 1 note shots, that are also mapped to multiple keys. Time stretching artifacts can show.

Not sure in case of vocals ~ I probably shouldn't judge that by my synthesizer experiences, especially since it has its own time stretching algorithm. Plus I didn't really use time stretching on vocals. If it's completely seamless even on 44.1, that would be great.

delineation
Posts: 9
Joined: 21 May 2019

Post 24 Aug 2019

Midi slave one to the other, split the guts of the .rns up between the two that makes most sense to you. ie. Drums, bass, and percussion on the laptop, Leads, fx, master mixdown on the Faster PC. Route audio L&R outputs of both to a mixer. If you have a serious set of I/O for each computer (16+ch each interface) you could direct out for each channel and completely mixdown outside the box.

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest