So, here is the thing, since almost all the recent high quality plugins are internally oversampling anyway to 192 kHz to handle well aliasing when heavily compressing, limiting and doing saturation, as well just run the session at 192 kHz. It turns out the benefit during processing are really nice.
It’s been a year now that I’m now working at 192 kHz regularly, and I clearly hear the benefits, even once bounced down to 24 bit 96 Khz, especially considering that computing power is getting less and less an issue. I use the Magma BB tube daily now on those session and I love it.
However, I’m very surprised to see that the new Magma channel strip doesn’t support 192 kHz. We are in 2023, not 2012…
I understand that some older plugin might not be designed for it, I get it. But new product not supporting it is unacceptable in my humble opinion.
Yeah, I’m at 96kHz. Not as beneficial as 192 to some respects, but I find that headroom is quite useful. If I’m worried about introducing too much aliasing I just turn down some of the highs on the way in and jack them up after the distortion process if I feel it appropriate.
Your 192k support makes sense, though. I suspect Waves will get there. Its probably just a little over on their priority list since the buzz word of the moment is “oversampling”. In a few years it will be something else.
I will say aliasing is just another type of distortion artefact that can also prove useful at times. I find it can add a nice bite to a sound when used in moderation, kind of like hard-clipping transistor distortion int a way, but not.
In 10 years time people will be wanting to recreate the sound of aliasing just as they have other types of distortion. As usual, once you eliminate something people will desire it more. Thats been the course of music history!!
I agree with everything you’ve said.
Yeah, 96 kHz is definitely workable. When I use 96 kHz, I do filter out anything above 20 khz before AND after distortion stage to always stay away from aliasing.
I agree that sometimes digital artifacts are desired. I indeed love playing with LoFi stuff too. Luckily, it’s always easy to create such artifacts.
My point is it’s annoying when you have a beautiful 192 kHz session running, and you try to add your brand new Waves plugin, and BANG! error, sorry that plugin doesn’t support your rate.
What do you do? You convert the entire session 96 kHz just for a plugin? Personally, I simply go pick up a plugin from plugin alliance and move on.
Chris
There are definitely some other devs doing 192kHz capability now, including some the low-end audio interfaces. As we’re heading into the 20s and computers are getting more powerful, it does seem that it would make sense for Waves to offer that kind of support now.
Hi, I have apple M1 ultra and can load with no problem lots of plugins with 192 khz. Try to reach the highest quality. Can load 3 waves plugins on 192 khz that’s all. And why CLA-76 and not clarity?
Hi @t.j.e.smeenk,
Not all Waves plugins support up to 192 khz, you can verify this from the product page of any Waves plugin by going to > Techs Specs > Sample Rate.
1 Like
Give it some time though, I’m sure wide 192kHz support might be on the roadmap, they just probably haven’t got there yet. As technology progresses into the future I’d say it would be inevitable though.