is possible to record with scope khz 96 asio and cubase 6?

[nunziata]

is possible to record with scope khz 96 asio and cubase 6?
Which asio is need to use ?
for make this recording

[garyb]

yes, it's possible. i'd use the asio2 float, myself....

of course, i wouldn't waste my time on 96k. i'd spend the money on other aspects of the studio, and the energy thinking about 96k on the actual music and performance, but that's just me...

[the19thbear]

As Gary says - it's possible:)
And.. Going off topic:
There is a Noticable difference between 96khz and 44.1, I have done back to back test between all normal rates between 44.1-96khz. -the same material but recorded in variyng sample rates and then Each project was mixed with the same settings and afterwards ALL summed down to 44.1 at ghe end of mixing/processing. and compared. You get a much better hi freq response on the material (moving nyqist freq up in the undetectable freq domain in the beginning if the recording process).
BUT think about all the extra resources you will use on this vs. How many people can actually tell the difference. I am the lucky owner of a pair of ears that can hear at least up 21khz but not alot of People can - I think I was the only one in the room that could tell the difference. And the difference was very noticeable. I'm not saying I've got golden ears or anything. I can improve alot in many areas of music and mixing, I'm just saying that most people won't be able to tell the difference at all, because most people don't physically have the ears to detect the hi freq stuff.
Just my thoughts though:)

[dante]

48Khz is a good compromise. I'm recording at 96KHz on XITE-1D but cant use many mix/master plugs at the same time. I'm archiving the 96KHz vocal recordings, then down rendering them to 48KHz for mix/master in Scope.

[garyb]

As Gary says - it's possible:)
And.. Going off topic:
There is a Noticable difference between 96khz and 44.1, I have done back to back test between all normal rates between 44.1-96khz. -the same material but recorded in variyng sample rates and then Each project was mixed with the same settings and afterwards ALL summed down to 44.1 at ghe end of mixing/processing. and compared. You get a much better hi freq response on the material (moving nyqist freq up in the undetectable freq domain in the beginning if the recording process).
BUT think about all the extra resources you will use on this vs. How many people can actually tell the difference. I am the lucky owner of a pair of ears that can hear at least up 21khz but not alot of People can - I think I was the only one in the room that could tell the difference. And the difference was very noticeable. I'm not saying I've got golden ears or anything. I can improve alot in many areas of music and mixing, I'm just saying that most people won't be able to tell the difference at all, because most people don't physically have the ears to detect the hi freq stuff.
Just my thoughts though:)

i couldn't agree more. all of us have a limited budget. i'd rather compromise the samplerate instead of on the mics, pres, room, or most of all, making the music work in the first place. if the parts work together properly, even 8 bit recording is groovy and pleasing. for others, the difference might be crucial, i don't know, do whatchu like.

as to the comparison, mixing to settings isn't the point. it's getting the best mix. who can say that you might not have done a better job at either samplerate...

yes, you can still do it. just don't complain about the cost in resources. you may need two or more computers at 96k to do the same job as one at 44.1k...

[nunziata]

so at least I do not understand a project, said limited resources?
I have two 30 DSP cards that I have brooms to take the moon?
I believe that the drivers have not been well designed by Sonic Core.'s why 'does not work either wavelab

[nunziata]

here look it

[the19thbear]

i dont fully understand what you wrote in the last post--- but please post a screenshot of your scope routing windows along with the dsp usage meter

[garyb]

at 96k, it takes DOUBLE the dsp, harddrive, memory and cpu resources as 48k does. some devices that take up several chips at 48k will need 5 or 6 dsps at 96k and those dsps may not be available on the same card or even on the same part of the card. there is a limit as to how physically far apart the chips can be and still have the device work. for that reason, you get the error and an offer to reorganize how the devices are loaded.

all problems are doubled at 96k!!!

[nunziata]

this is the project, i don't think that are there very resorce opened

[the19thbear]

so you are saying that you get the error message that the dsp limit reached, even when it is not reached?
I get the error often, and it is solved by pressing "yes" - it doesnt solve your problem?

[garyb]

did my explanation not make sense?

it's a generalization about what happens, but it's how the system works.

a dsp overload, or big modules don't fit can happen before you load all the dsps, just like ProTools HD. Scope loads devices onto dsps according to rules that are designed to maximize the loads. depending on the order that things are loaded, there may or may not be room for a device that must be split amongst 2 or more dsps that are physically too far apart for the latency between chips(it takes actual time to communicate along a copper trace between chips) to allow realtime operation. in that case, Scope offer you a "global optimization", a reshuffling of the dsp loads, a redo of the order devices are loaded in, to find a working combination.

you may or may not get this message, it usually depends on the order that devices are added. you're twice as likely(at least) to see the message at 96k. that's how it is. that's one reason why one big card is better than two or three small ones. you're less likely to have chip to chip latencies that are too long to work when all the chips are on the same card.

[the19thbear]

aha... so his newest screenshot shows the dsp usage AFTER he has hit "yes" to dsp optimizing (which it cant do, because of 96khz/the project is too large) , thats why it shows zero dsp usage, because nothign is activated... thats at least what i gather from the picture

so my advice is:

Start from scratch with a new blank routing window, set the project to be 96khz, add modules untill you get the "dsp optimize" box and press yes, if the project still works, add new modules, untill you run out of dsp. = do your work with whatever devices your can load, or buy a 15dsp card/xite

[nunziata]

I think that has to do soniccore asio drivers better, that's all.

[the19thbear]

If the dsp's are full, then they are full... it has nothing to do with drivers.
If you do as i said, and start from an empty project and add devices until the dsps are filled, it should work fine. - you might not get all the devices you want, because of the high samplerate, and therefore dsp usage, but you should to pass audio through some devices without any problems.

[nunziata]

Too steinberg have talk regards and no problem there it
the release must be done by sonicore .and improving software , engine and the compatibility with sequencer
no possible are issue all this of stability , another audio card no give problems.
i am angry , becouse i have purchase 12,000 euro of hardware two
z link 15 scope dsp with two converter a 16 ultra .and i don't have a study recording professional .
i don't put hardware resource so much in my project .aren't nothing for 30 dsp . i don't understand in this moment

[nunziata]

another thing . why headroom in mix is -20 about db turn up the gain to level recording tools? is normal ?
but if i set a +4 db the my converter a 16 ultra

[next to nothing]

1. Did you record 96khz in another sequencer? is this something that suddenly happened whith cubase 6?
2. When you post screenshots, please post the whole routing window, with info on what devices is loaded and your dsp meter.
3. What happens when you press "si" on that error message?

[nunziata]

you want see my project ?

nothing hardware i think
why my resource are full.
almost believe that impossible in this moment put the asio driver becouse no it.

[nunziata]

when I add a bus, not added. so it is impossible to move forward.