AA plugs report Reaper Oversample 96k as 88.2k

[loji]

Setting the Reaper oversampling for an FX instance to ~96k only doubles the rate (not oversample to 96k)

N4 reports an 88.2 rate when oversample engaged, likewise for 192k = 176400

is this expected behavior?

[Justin]

Yep the ~ means approximately— it only doubles rates does not do 44 to 96 etc. Perhaps we should rename these to 88/96 and 176/192 etc

[loji]

Thanks Justin,

or a simple x2, x4, etc ..

ie: what happens if you're at 88.2 and select the ~96k option?

is it x2 of 88.2 ... or . . .

[ScuzzyEye]

Originally Posted by loji

Thanks Justin,

or a simple x2, x4, etc ..

ie: what happens if you're at 88.2 and select the ~96k option?

is it x2 of 88.2 ... or . . .

I think the problem with saying x2 or x4, is if you're running at 96k already, x4 puts the rate at 384k, and many plug-in don't support anything higher than 192k. So it isn't really a multiplier-based oversampling, but instead setting a requested (higher) sampling rate for the plug-in to be run at. Thus setting it to ~96k when working at 88.2k, gets 88.2k. Same as if you render at 192k, but have the oversampling at ~96k, you'll get 192k, because it picks the highest of the requested rates (be it FX instance or chain, or indeed rendering that is the greatest).

I think the proposed 88.2k/96k and 176.4k/192k labels are the most clear. You know you're getting integer oversampling. Fractional resampling is much harder to get right, and I try to avoid it if at all possible, knowing that Reaper is planning to do the right thing based on the label is helpful.

[Justin]

Originally Posted by loji

Thanks Justin,

or a simple x2, x4, etc ..

ie: what happens if you're at 88.2 and select the ~96k option?

is it x2 of 88.2 ... or . . .

If you're at 88.2 and you select ~96k, it still runs at 88.2