Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-06-2009, 03:57 AM   #41
dub3000
Human being with feelings
 
dub3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,831
Default

2 hours probably isn't "really quickly" but it's done.

BETA TEST ONLY! SOX massconvert util
NOTE: probably not compatible with multiple take items!
USE AT OWN RISK!
Usage: have SOX and Python installed. Customize script for quality options, SOX install location.

Select items in Reaper. Run this script. SOX will be invoked on everything and the resulting files will be added to Reaper session on new tracks (at start of session).
Code tries to be safe and not overwrite files etc but please use caution regardless!
Make sure everything is glued beforehand - SOX runs on the underlying file, not the selected range in Reaper. So if you have a tiny piece of a huge file, SOX will try and convert the whole thing. Glue at same samplerate first to stop that.

Files are generated to OLDFILENAME.RESAMPLED.WAV, and it'll try not to overwrite existing files.

INCREDIBLY EARLY CODE! BACKUP THINGS AND USE WITH CAUTION (should be fine though - it doesn't do any file manipulation itself, and checks that the output file doesn't exist before invoking SOX, all items are inserted back into Reaper on their own track at the top of the project).

Note - this script could be easily customized for aaaaaaaaall sorts of external file manipulation. Go have fun with it.
Attached Files
File Type: zip soxConvert.zip (1.4 KB, 113 views)
dub3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2009, 02:21 PM   #42
dub3000
Human being with feelings
 
dub3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,831
Default

So... Does this work as intended for anyone else?
dub3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2009, 02:22 PM   #43
intrsoul
Human being with feelings
 
intrsoul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 32
Default

This is completely new to me - pardon the n00b.

Does this resampling only apply to audio in the *timeline* or any audio that is loaded into VST sampler plugins as well?

Also, does this only apply when audio is imported, or during a mixdown as well? E.g. what about 'Save Live Output to Disk'? As long as I use 24bit, I'm fine?

Does anyone know how Cubase handles this? Pre-process on input (new files)? What about its resampling algo?

Thx
intrsoul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2009, 02:23 AM   #44
Audiop
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 24
Default

This is really great dub3000! I'll read thru, digest and try it out in short.

Add like to add that my interest in SRC is for render/mixdown so realtime while playback is not an issue to me.

Regarding Reaper dither, I haven't found info about it and in particular I'm interested in the spectra of the shaped dither. I'd like to try something like the low Shibata that can be found in SoX. I'll search on the website and in the manual to see if I can find what I'm looking for.


/Peter
Audiop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2009, 03:03 AM   #45
dub3000
Human being with feelings
 
dub3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
This is really great dub3000! I'll read thru, digest and try it out in short.

Add like to add that my interest in SRC is for render/mixdown so realtime while playback is not an issue to me.

Regarding Reaper dither, I haven't found info about it and in particular I'm interested in the spectra of the shaped dither. I'd like to try something like the low Shibata that can be found in SoX. I'll search on the website and in the manual to see if I can find what I'm looking for.


/Peter
not 100% sure, but i think i read somewhere that the reaper dither is based on schwa's psycho dither: http://www.stillwellaudio.com/forums....php?f=18&t=34

if in doubt - render a track with dither, null it against the original, and run some analysis on it - should show you roughly what's going on for that type of source material.

edit: i should point out, i think Reaper's rate conversion is fine - my interest in that script is more from a reascript point of view than a rate conversion point of view. :-)
dub3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2009, 05:55 AM   #46
zappa
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 427
Default

To all posters of the "I can't hear any difference" opinion: generally such differences as described here become more apparent with high end monitoring equipment ie. from the DA stage onward.

This was highlighted for me when a few years ago at Sony's research centre in their OXFR3 control room: typically inaudible digital inaccuracies on "average" equipment were very perceptible on their flagship monitors.

In the end we want Reaper to shine when used with high-end equipment and better resampling algorithms result in more accurate sound. I would always vote for these kind of improvements.

z.
__________________
http://www.droppingknowledge.org
"There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers" - anon.

Please check my (recently reopened) Normalisation bugrep and confirm, thanks!
zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2009, 06:23 AM   #47
dub3000
Human being with feelings
 
dub3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,831
Default

Oh, I can see the difference on a scope between different src algorithms. But once you get past a certain point, you'd get a bigger difference in sound moving the mic 1cm to the left.

In any case, I can't hear past 17khz anymore, and if you're 30 or older you probably can't either. Better to concentrate on just making good mixes and solid arrangements.
dub3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 10:06 AM   #48
David Else
Human being with feelings
 
David Else's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Near London, UK
Posts: 577
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
And these modes are provided for creative potential -- the medium quality modes sound great and are relatively quick, IMO.

We have no problem in adding support for LGPL algorithms (for example we use SoundTouch...). The main problem is that REAPER's SRC needs to be dynamic, i.e. supporting changing samplerates on the fly without big penalty.
SoX is NOW supporting changing samplerates on the fly inside Audacity 2.0.3

http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Libsoxr

"For variable-rate resampling, libsoxr uses a single, dedicated quality level; this is selected automatically by Audacity when performing a task that requires it. "

Apparantly this realtime mode is not set to the highest quality by default. I wrote on the Audacity forums to ask some questions in relation to SoX and got a little more info:

http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewto...d+else#p204358
__________________
----------> Fedora Linux Distribution = Computing Joy & Freedom <----------
Learn Digital Audio Home | 'Nebula Explained' Course Out Now! | YouTube Channel | Twitter
David Else is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2013, 07:16 PM   #49
DuX
Human being with feelings
 
DuX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Underworld
Posts: 1,092
Default

Having SoX SRC in Reaper would be a great time-saver!
__________________
Goodnight, thank you, and may your God go with you.
DuX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 08:02 PM   #50
tronhammer
Human being with feelings
 
tronhammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 16
Default

having used SoX in prior dev projects, I'd highly advocate for its integration.
__________________
Melodic Death Metal up the ass, 100% recorded and mixed in Reaper, enjoy

www.myspace.com/DarkVitalFlames
tronhammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 08:29 PM   #51
sstillwell
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cowtown
Posts: 1,555
Default

Eek...thread necromancy!
__________________
https://www.stillwellaudio.com/
sstillwell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013, 01:09 AM   #52
Sleep opposed
Human being with feelings
 
Sleep opposed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 325
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
And these modes are provided for creative potential -- the medium quality modes sound great and are relatively quick, IMO.

We have no problem in adding support for LGPL algorithms (for example we use SoundTouch...). The main problem is that REAPER's SRC needs to be dynamic, i.e. supporting changing samplerates on the fly without big penalty.
FWIW i love glitching stuff and trying different modes to see how the artifacts shape things
Sleep opposed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013, 01:27 AM   #53
mustgroove
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 444
Default

+ 100 for Reaper integration
mustgroove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2013, 08:14 PM   #54
Argitoth
Human being with feelings
 
Argitoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,055
Default

integrate it. I'm having to do a lot of back-and-forth sample rate conversions due to the nature of my work. I currently have to import 44100 --> export 176400 --> import 176400 --> export back to 44100, this is madness! SoX would make it a little less mad.
__________________
Soundemote - Home of the chaosfly and pretty oscilloscope.
MyReaperPlugin - Easy-to-use cross-platform C++ REAPER extension template

Last edited by Argitoth; 11-24-2013 at 08:22 PM.
Argitoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2014, 10:37 PM   #55
Tronic
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 91
Default

+1
It's the time for this.
Tronic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2014, 09:13 AM   #56
Kamil
Human being with feelings
 
Kamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: KW, Ontario
Posts: 268
Default

Ableton Live's 9.1 update included a major overhaul of their resampling engine. Guess what they changed it to? SoX
__________________
Ambition, Transmission, Transition.
Kamil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2014, 09:16 PM   #57
Argitoth
Human being with feelings
 
Argitoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,055
Default

*bump*

I need this more than ever, I need to convert thousands of files using SoX, and I need to use its speed effect (changing the speed/playback rate of the wav). It's taking hours to convert from 48khz to 192khz (and changing media item rate before exporting) in REAPER. SoX would speed this up, make it more feasible.

For me, I hear the difference between sample rate conversion quality when changing item playback rate, using stretch markers, etc. I can't work with files unless I am using the highest conversion algorithm or else I hear artifacts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dub3000 View Post
BETA TEST ONLY! SOX massconvert util
I'm going to check out that Python script, it might help me do what I need.
__________________
Soundemote - Home of the chaosfly and pretty oscilloscope.
MyReaperPlugin - Easy-to-use cross-platform C++ REAPER extension template
Argitoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2014, 10:12 PM   #58
Argitoth
Human being with feelings
 
Argitoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,055
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
And these modes are provided for creative potential -- the medium quality modes sound great and are relatively quick, IMO.

We have no problem in adding support for LGPL algorithms (for example we use SoundTouch...). The main problem is that REAPER's SRC needs to be dynamic, i.e. supporting changing samplerates on the fly without big penalty.
Just want to quickly add that SoX has a bend parameter. Does that solve the problem of changing sample rate on the fly?

Quote:
bend [−f frame-rate(25)] [−o over-sample(16)] { delay,cents,duration }
Changes pitch by specified amounts at specified times. Each given triple: delay,cents,duration specifies one bend. delay is the amount of time after the start of the audio stream, or the end of the previous bend, at which to start bending the pitch; cents is the number of cents (100 cents = 1 semitone) by which to bend the pitch, and duration the length of time over which the pitch will be bent.
The pitch-bending algorithm utilises the Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT) at a particular frame rate and over-sampling rate. The −f and −o parameters may be used to adjust these parameters and thus control the smoothness of the changes in pitch.
For example, an initial tone is generated, then bent three times, yielding four different notes in total:
Code:
   play −n synth 2.5 sin 667 gain 1 \
     bend .35,180,.25  .15,740,.53  0,−520,.3
__________________
Soundemote - Home of the chaosfly and pretty oscilloscope.
MyReaperPlugin - Easy-to-use cross-platform C++ REAPER extension template
Argitoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 02:58 PM   #59
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

Let's bump this thread now, 3 years later... SoX is still free, supports dynamic SR changes, and it beats any other SRC out there.

So why not have it in Reaper as a resampler of choice, optionally?
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 03:06 PM   #60
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
supports dynamic SR changes
If I recall right from the last time looking at this, the absolute highest quality option in Sox doesn't work with time varying changes.
__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 03:07 PM   #61
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

Audacity seems to do it. (Link from David Else's post above, #48.)

http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewto...204415#p204358


At any rate, having SoX support in Reaper if only for rendering would still be amazing.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 03:09 PM   #62
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
amazing.
Why? What is so amazing about it? Why is it needed, besides for wanking with analysis result graphics and numbers?
__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 03:11 PM   #63
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

It is the cleanest one out there. I am not buying the -90 dB argument Justin mentioned here. It's audible when you have resampled material hitting compressors hard.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 03:15 PM   #64
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
It's audible when you have resampled material hitting compressors hard.
No sound example, of course? (A full Reaper project demonstrating it would be better so if there's some obviously audible problem, it could be better analyzed why it is like it is...)
__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 03:17 PM   #65
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

Why so much resistance to something that's better in every possible way, as an option?

Analysis was already made by infinitewave, no? Audible problems in Reaper's SRC can be seen there (and I'm not talking about the sinewave sweep, check out passband bump and transition ripples - ripples are just not cool in a SRC filter).
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 03:52 PM   #66
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
It is the cleanest one out there. I am not buying the -90 dB argument Justin mentioned here. It's audible when you have resampled material hitting compressors hard.
He is essentially saying that if the visual matched the audial proportionally you'd not be able to see the graph. I don't care personally but I do agree there is a point where someone needs to be able to demonstrate a worthwhile problem because the bigger point in his answer is the amount of work involved contrasted with the real and actual benefit. I can't disagree with him on that one if no one is willing to convince his ears instead of his eyes.

Trust me, I literally don't care, just providing some perspective.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.

Last edited by karbomusic; 03-16-2017 at 04:03 PM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 09:00 PM   #67
Justin
Administrator
 
Justin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,437
Default

They should update src.infinitewave with REAPER 5.01+ extreme mode (and while they are at it, drop REAPER 1.x, 2.x, 3.5x, 4.x from the list, I suppose ) ... the sinc SRC modes changed in 5.01 w/ some significant improvements if I recall correctly.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 11:02 PM   #68
TonE
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Reaper HAS send control via midi !!!
Posts: 1,847
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
Let's bump this thread now, 3 years later... SoX is still free, supports dynamic SR changes, and it beats any other SRC out there.

So why not have it in Reaper as a resampler of choice, optionally?
Good question. Having sox as an external media editor, is also a good idea. Not sure for what however.
TonE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 12:11 AM   #69
bezusheist
Human being with feelings
 
bezusheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 701
Default

Reaper's SRC does show improvement from the (outdated) graphs at infinite wave.
it looks like the SRC artifacts are just a little above 24 bit level with a full scale sweep/sine test. it would be nice if they were a hair lower so you could effectively dither before SRC, but it is not a perfect world i guess...(unless you use SoX. )
bezusheist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 12:25 AM   #70
Tale
Human being with feelings
 
Tale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,975
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
They should update src.infinitewave with REAPER 5.01+ extreme mode (and while they are at it, drop REAPER 1.x, 2.x, 3.5x, 4.x from the list, I suppose ) ... the sinc SRC modes changed in 5.01 w/ some significant improvements if I recall correctly.
And also, I think the Blackman-Harris window bug was fixed in 5.0. So yeah, the REAPER info at src.infinitewave.ca is somewhat outdated...

BTW, another nice resampling lib is r8brain-free-src. Then again, REAPER's own resampling is more than good enough for me, so meh (IMHO; YMMV).
__________________
Martinic Kee Bass - Scanner Vibrato - Elka Panther - Tale's JSFX Pack
Tale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 05:41 AM   #71
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
They should update src.infinitewave with REAPER 5.01+ extreme mode (and while they are at it, drop REAPER 1.x, 2.x, 3.5x, 4.x from the list, I suppose ) ... the sinc SRC modes changed in 5.01 w/ some significant improvements if I recall correctly.
I sent them test files rendered with the new Extreme mode, so it will be updated eventually. However, they're not removing any previous results


Also, there's something that charts can't say, and that's CPU utilization. What if SoX is actually less CPU intensive than 768pt sinc? Of course, I'm not sure how to test this until it's actually implemented in Reaper... any ideas?

Last edited by EvilDragon; 03-17-2017 at 05:47 AM.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 05:46 AM   #72
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
However, they're not removing any previous results
Because it is a website intended to fuel useless and endless forum discussions.
__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 06:24 AM   #73
Justin
Administrator
 
Justin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,437
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
However, they're not removing any previous results
In that case they should at least change "Reaper" to be "Reaper 1.0" or whatever version it was at that time...
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 06:57 AM   #74
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

I will notify them.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2017, 01:59 PM   #75
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

So results of the new Extreme preset (768 pt sinc) are up on infinitewave website (and "Reaper" entry was renamed to "Reaper 1", as per request).

SoX is still better across the board.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2017, 02:04 PM   #76
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post

SoX is still better across the board.
Close your eyes mang, close your eyes and reevaluate.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2017, 02:19 PM   #77
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

I can't.

I don't want to think about resampling quality when I'm doing any conversions, honestly. If SoX were there, I really wouldn't need to think about it.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2017, 02:25 PM   #78
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
I can't.

I don't want to think about resampling quality when I'm doing any conversions, honestly. If SoX were there, I really wouldn't need to think about it.
I think you already don't need to think about it. It's not something I think is worth debating, but just because that comparison can show such minute differences while at the same time no one can even reliably tell the difference between 44.1k and MP3/320kb, I have to think there is little to worry about here. That was really my hidden message, we allow our eyes to scare us unnecessarily even though we couldn't hear it no matter how hard we tried when properly tested.

The biggest thing I've ever worried about is that one section of that one in one thousand songs that exposes some particular weakness but that even hasn't happened to me as far as conversions that are at the level we are at now.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2017, 02:37 PM   #79
TryingToMakeMusic
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
no one can even reliably tell the difference between 44.1k and MP3/320kb
Give me two WAVs that differ by a single bit, and I will give you a VST FX that yields wildly different results when acting on the two WAV's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
It's not something I think is worth debating....
Yet here you are, doing just that. What you really mean is, you don't think anyone should disagree with you, because you think everyone should use their DAW just like you use yours.
TryingToMakeMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2017, 02:39 PM   #80
TryingToMakeMusic
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
I can't.

I don't want to think about resampling quality when I'm doing any conversions, honestly. If SoX were there, I really wouldn't need to think about it.
If they added SoX, you could still think about whether Brick might be even better than SoX:

http://camil.music.illinois.edu/software/brick/
TryingToMakeMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.