Waves Flow Motion - New FM Synth

[Gamma-UT]

I wonder how many of those studios and users clicked the "helpful" little button that Central puts up about updating all the rest of their Waves plugins only to find WUP or not, they were getting updated to v10. And then thought "WTF? Why did this rig break?"

Are they all stupid? Or is Waves dumb for not indicating upfront what will get updated to what if you say yes?

It's not the first time Waves have done something stupid with their installers. I remember the time when you had to make sure all your existing stuff was ticked when installing a demo or a new one because it would cheerfully hoover up and delete your installed plugins if you forgot.

[zzz00m]

Surely this plugin will be priced $29 in the future, so I will just keep waiting

Not $29 yet, but close! But it is currently $30.93 at AudioDeluxe in your cart with automatic "BLACK2018" (-$5.38) coupon, if you also add the "YNY23" (-$2.69) coupon. Both get deducted from the listed $39 price.

[synth guru]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvPMOZgPj2w

[synth guru]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHiPtVP4jgs

[plexuss]

The fact that it doesn't work on any rate but 44.1k and 48k is confirmed here, hidden in the product specs. It's a shame...

https://www.waves.com/plugins/flow-moti ... ample-rate

Flow Motion FM Synth (V10) - Sample Rate

All Waves plugins support 44.1 kHz and 48 kHz; most support higher sample rates.
Avid VENUE supports up to 48 kHz.
TDM is no longer supported by Waves v9.6 or later: learn more.

Plugin SAMPLE RATE
Flow Motion FM Synth 48 kHz

[synth guru]

The fact that it doesn't work on any rate but 44.1k and 48k is confirmed here, hidden in the product specs. It's a shame...

https://www.waves.com/plugins/flow-moti ... ample-rate

Flow Motion FM Synth (V10) - Sample Rate

All Waves plugins support 44.1 kHz and 48 kHz; most support higher sample rates.
Avid VENUE supports up to 48 kHz.
TDM is no longer supported by Waves v9.6 or later: learn more.

Plugin SAMPLE RATE
Flow Motion FM Synth 48 kHz

Anything above 48k is overkill in today's standards of DVD, MP3, Youtube, Spotify, etc.

If you're doing classical music heard on an audiophile system, you might want to worry, otherwise it's pointless.

[plexuss]

Anything above 48k is overkill in today's standards of DVD, MP3, Youtube, Spotify, etc.

If you're doing classical music heard on an audiophile system, you might want to worry, otherwise it's pointless.

You are incorrect. There are many reasons to use higher project sample rates. The Nyquist Theory is only one small part of digital audio considerations. There are many other aspects that benefit from higher rates that result in better audio quality.

[woggle]

Anything above 48k is overkill in today's standards of DVD, MP3, Youtube, Spotify, etc.

If you're doing classical music heard on an audiophile system, you might want to worry, otherwise it's pointless.

You are incorrect. There are many reasons to use higher project sample rates. The Nyquist Theory is only one small part of digital audio considerations. There are many other aspects that benefit from higher rates that result in better audio quality.

internal sampling of plugins benefits but not audio itself - so you can run the DAW at 48K but the plugins can be running higher for precision

[synth guru]

Anything above 48k is overkill in today's standards of DVD, MP3, Youtube, Spotify, etc.

If you're doing classical music heard on an audiophile system, you might want to worry, otherwise it's pointless.

You are incorrect. There are many reasons to use higher project sample rates. The Nyquist Theory is only one small part of digital audio considerations. There are many other aspects that benefit from higher rates that result in better audio quality.

Music is art, not a technical equation.

It's not going to make the song and performances any better, let's be honest with ourselves.

It's not going to change the emotion, feel and vibe of the production.

Be my guest if you want to waste extra resources on storage, cpu cycles and latency.

[pixel85]

Anything above 48k is overkill in today's standards of DVD, MP3, Youtube, Spotify, etc.

If you're doing classical music heard on an audiophile system, you might want to worry, otherwise it's pointless.

You are incorrect. There are many reasons to use higher project sample rates. The Nyquist Theory is only one small part of digital audio considerations. There are many other aspects that benefit from higher rates that result in better audio quality.

internal sampling of plugins benefits but not audio itself - so you can run the DAW at 48K but the plugins can be running higher for precision

Project in native higher resolution vs project in lower resolution + plugins that have to do over- and down-sampling in real-time... Guess what is more computer resource efficient. Of course real-time up/down sampling is not in the highest quality in most of the cases and HQ mode is reserved for offline export while in native higher resolution this problem disappear.

btw. it may surprise some people but audio production industry is much much broader than "making beats". In sound design, higher sample rate resolution is a standard. Why? If you want to know don't be ignorant and read about other departments of our industry.

[synth guru]

Anything above 48k is overkill in today's standards of DVD, MP3, Youtube, Spotify, etc.

If you're doing classical music heard on an audiophile system, you might want to worry, otherwise it's pointless.

You are incorrect. There are many reasons to use higher project sample rates. The Nyquist Theory is only one small part of digital audio considerations. There are many other aspects that benefit from higher rates that result in better audio quality.

internal sampling of plugins benefits but not audio itself - so you can run the DAW at 48K but the plugins can be running higher for precision

Project in native higher resolution vs project in lower resolution + plugins that have to do over- and down-sampling in real-time... Guess what is more computer resource efficient. Of course real-time up/down sampling is not in the highest quality in most of the cases and HQ mode is reserved for offline export while in native higher resolution this problem disappear.

btw. it may surprise some people but audio production industry is much much broader than "making beats". In sound design, higher sample rate resolution is a standard. Why? If you want to know don't be ignorant and read about other departments of our industry.

I would bet that 94% of people work with 44.1k.

I would bet that 5% of people work with 48k.

And the remaining 1% of people work above 48k.

There are no audio differences to the average consumer and playback systems, it's just another thing to obsess over and has nothing to do with music what so ever.

The "magic" is in the song, performances, arrangement and mix. Not which D/A or A/D converters you used, if you're using external clocking or what bit rate it is.

Some nerd-types like to try and convince themselves they are artists that don't need musical talent or craftsmanship. And it all depends on what gear, formulas and equations they can own or calculate.

Good luck with the number crunching music, let me know how that works out for you.

[Stefken]

Some nerd-types like to try and convince themselves they are artists that don't need musical talent or craftsmanship. And it all depends on what gear, formulas and equations they can own or calculate.

Good luck with the number crunching music, let me know how that works out for you.

You really need to work on your bedside manners. You have a problem man.
And first we were technically incompetent. No we are nerds. Which is it then??

There are no audio differences to the average consumer and playback systems, it's just another thing to obsess over and has nothing to do with music what so ever.

The "magic" is in the song, performances, arrangement and mix. Not which D/A or A/D converters you used, if you're using external clocking or what bit rate it is.

The perception of an average consumer is not what an artist is working towards.
To draw a parallel. The average consumer won't know what lens or camera a picture is made with or appreciate on a conscious level the difference a quality lens brings to the table. But I will; so will experts.
We might as well work towards 128K mp3 files with in-ear plugs and forget about all the rest.
Anyways, it's everybody's choice to make on their own.

While I can appreciate that there is a danger of technical issues drawing you away from the artistic level, it's also everybody's choice to make. Some people like the tech. I enjoyed as much talking about digital sensors (while it was still a domain with great technical advances and challenges) as taking photographs. It's just a different way to be 'busy' within a domain.

[woggle]

Project in native higher resolution vs project in lower resolution + plugins that have to do over- and down-sampling in real-time... Guess what is more computer resource efficient. Of course real-time up/down sampling is not in the highest quality in most of the cases and HQ mode is reserved for offline export while in native higher resolution this problem disappear.

I don't think this is correct in practice - running at 96K or higher uses a lot of resources eg memory, upsampling is trivially easy with no overhead beyond being at the higher sampling rate ie memory again, downsampling slightly different but also trivial in terms of computational load

btw. it may surprise some people but audio production industry is much much broader than "making beats". In sound design, higher sample rate resolution is a standard. Why? If you want to know don't be ignorant and read about other departments of our industry.

doesn't surprise me - I have been playing with adjusting sample rate tags for decades - actually this old school reminisce reminded me of using file headers as samples via RAW. Must play with that and convolution again.

[synth guru]

Some nerd-types like to try and convince themselves they are artists that don't need musical talent or craftsmanship. And it all depends on what gear, formulas and equations they can own or calculate.

Good luck with the number crunching music, let me know how that works out for you.

You really need to work on your bedside manners. You have a problem man.
And first we were technically incompetent. No we are nerds. Which is it then??

There are no audio differences to the average consumer and playback systems, it's just another thing to obsess over and has nothing to do with music what so ever.

The "magic" is in the song, performances, arrangement and mix. Not which D/A or A/D converters you used, if you're using external clocking or what bit rate it is.

The perception of an average consumer is not what an artist is working towards.
To draw a parallel. The average consumer won't know what lens or camera a picture is made with or appreciate on a conscious level the difference a quality lens brings to the table. But I will; so will experts.
We might as well work towards 128K mp3 files with in-ear plugs and forget about all the rest.
Anyways, it's everybody's choice to make on their own.

While I can appreciate that there is a danger of technical issues drawing you away from the artistic level, it's also everybody's choice to make. Some people like the tech. I enjoyed as much talking about digital sensors (while it was still a domain with great technical advances and challenges) as taking photographs. It's just a different way to be 'busy' within a domain.

Obsessing over things that don't make any difference to the music is a waste of time and energy. Believe it or not, some people are still hung up on Analog vs Digital, it's time to move on.

It's easier to think you're missing some piece of gear or digital calculation, then having to actually get better at playing an instrument, learning music theory and recording it all properly.

We won't even get into songwriting, performances, arrangement and mixing... which has nothing to do with bit rate. I would spend more time and energy on getting to that point first, before worrying about technical roadblocks in your believe system on how it should be rendered and delivered.

Then maybe at that point you might actually begin to see that it's no where near as important as the song. People who are actually listening to and enjoying the music don't hear all the little things that engineers obsess over, nor do they care.

[plexuss]

The bottom line for me is that when I can render in 96/24 the audio sounds better than when rendered in lower rates. I have only compared 44/24 to 96/24 renders and in all cases, when all the plugins are working properly in both rates, 96/24 is the obvious winner. I trust my ears over anything some audio twit says in a forum.

Wave confirms "As per the Tech Specs for the Flow Motion, it is supported up to 48k. For the moment there are no plan to get it supported in higher sample rates."

Deal breaker