A16 Ultra --> 96kHz ???

EZmusic · Post by **EZmusic** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 3:24 pm

I have a Pulsar 1 card and a A16 Ultra.

According to Creamware support USA I have to add a Luna 2-card with Z-link for 8 channels of 96kHz. The other 8 channels of 96kHz I get if I combine the 2 ADAT connections with the s/mux option in the sample rate settings.

So I did. I went to the store and bought a Luna II card, installed it, connected the stdm-cable, installed Scope 4 software. But I still can't use the A16 ultra in 96kHz mode, because there is no s/mux option in my sample rate settings!!!!

Does anyone have a sollution to this problem?????

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 5:38 pm

I'm afraid pulsar1 doesn't do s/mux...

You'll need a luna2 extension to have 16 adats chqnnel more, or get insteqd of the luna, a pulsar2 zlink directly

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat May 01, 2004 6:17 am

aside from that a Pulsar One has a slower IO interface than Luna and followers.
Everything at 96 is twice as fast (has to process 2 samples in the same amount of time).
I wouldn't suggest this configuration at all if you're serious about 96k applications. A 14 DSP board would be a better idea. That samplerate eats DSPs for breakfast

I personally considered this Luna 96 thing just a marketing gag - they 'had' to, because most of the competition proclaimed they could. It's a (not so) well known trick to play back 48k samples at twice the rate, which in fact is a 96k clock then...

cheers, Tom

krizrox · Post by **krizrox** » Sat May 01, 2004 7:08 am

Ya know - I understand 96kHz has it's time and place but I have to be honest...

I can't justify dealing with the size of the files involved. It's almost scary what happens when you record 10-12 tracks of 96kHz audio.

Maybe if I was recording Aretha Franklin or Mariah Carey, ok, I could see that. But bands with names like "The Pinheads" or "The Revolting Bedbugs" don't justify the overhead.

Actually, in cases like that, less clarity is better.

My advice: get the Pulsar Z-Link board. You'll thank me later.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: krizrox on 2004-05-01 08:12 ]</font>

Post by **hubird** » Sat May 01, 2004 7:13 am

On 2004-05-01 08:08, krizrox wrote:
Actually, in cases like that, less clarity is better.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat May 01, 2004 10:19 am

On 2004-05-01 08:08, krizrox wrote:
...or Mariah Carey, ok, I could see that. ...

mmmaybe in this case 32k would apply even better: achieve that breezy touch with fewer eq and possibly add a little character as well... sorry couldn't resist

since I have a 2nd Pulsar I can at least try out 96k from time to time.
In some cases it's almost undistinguishable, but some devices reveal more details in the high end of the spectrum.
I'm not shure if this is due to a real increase of details or just a matter of a different spectral distribution, which could also be generated by applying an appropriate eq setting.
Anyway, imho the increase of processing load is not worth the result - in my apps of course.

cheers, Tom

Post by **garyb** » Sat May 01, 2004 1:14 pm

agreed. more is not always "better".

Post by **Guest** » Tue May 04, 2004 4:53 pm

Luna II will give you the 8 ch @96Khz via Zlink.
You probably misunderstood their answer, support USA or Germany can not tell you that Pulsar I can do 96Khz. Pulsar I does not support 96Khz via ADAT. This is a FACT.

Maybe they told you to achive 8 ch of 96 Khz via the A16 you can add the luna to your set up. As Luna II Zlink connected to A16 via Zlink will give you 8 ch@ 96 Khz.

Post by **Guest** » Tue May 04, 2004 5:51 pm

Solution:

connect the luna II Zlink via firewire to A16 Ultra.

in your samplerate use the Zlink A.

this should replace the S-Mux option.
Since S-Mux does not apply to pulsarI.

In Pulsar envirinment use the Zlink A source and destination.