Merging Pyramix v10.1.3-V.R

On the one hand I believe it's always a bad idea to do something you cannot hear. If you're mixing/mastering in DSD (or DSM precisely), but your hardware can output PCM only, then you cannot hear what you're actually doing there. A bit like mixing stereo on a mono speaker...

On the other hand the very final master for distribution doesn´t need more than 16-bit/44,1kHz (it even can do harm), which is PCM again. So 24-bit/192kHz should be more than enough in the recording/mixing stage. DSD doesn't really have a "higher" resolution. Even if the sampling rate is over 2MHz, the bit depth is only 1-bit, since it's a complete different approach to digital audio.

Not to mention that there are a lot(!) more software/plug-ins/whatever for PCM than for DSM.

going from 44.1 to 96 is a difference. with 96 to 192 there is quite little difference, especially on the Fireface 800 (which I have, believe me there are much better converters out there). DSD, while harder to process and "up to 2MHz", doesn't have many (as in wide-spread) actual converters around AND to many doesn't quite sound as good as 192/24.
Basically, you can work with DSD if you want to but I think you might just be wasting your time. I'd work in 96/24 and export/render in 192/24.
In the end, most people, even if you are working with crazy-good jazz or classic music (which I doubt since you are using a FF800 (no offense)), are only going to listen to it on the cripple of a format that is 44.1/16 or even MP3.
But don't worry, I get you, you want to deliver the best you can but 96/24 and 192/24 are good enough especially since the FF800 is noisier on the inputs than 192/24. If you also use its MicPres/InstrPre, then beyond 96/24 is pointless because of the noise floor (not to say that it's bad but it's just high enough that it wouldn't make a difference).
Also, you can do a lot with 96/24 on modern computers in terms of "many tracks and a big handful of plugins" but 192 and DSD seem to be too much atm (and with CPU performance improvement being effectively halted for the last 5 years I don't see PCs comming soon that will be able to handle much at these resolutions).

/rant over

Thank you for the input ternator.
Would you please comment on Pyramix. Also for ''crazy-good jazz or classic music" which much better converters would you recommend??? Why do you upsample for export and render??? and which SRC do you use for this operation???
Thank you in advance

well till recently, antelope's stuff used to kick ass. but then came Slate with their VRS-8 and destroyed everything. like, seriously, if Steven delivers on that end, boy are the other interface makers going to panic. 0.7ms roundtrip native PCIe/Thunderbolt + pretty much best converters in the world + ultra-linear preamps + all the peramp moleding vsts and the other shit Slate brought out in the last years.
And as far as I'm informed, if you work at 96 but export 192, that "render-file" is going to be rendered at 192k. So all the effects are going to run at 192k.
Example: record a shaker at 44.1. Now put your favourite reverb plugin on that shaker, dial it in good. Nevermind why you would want reverb on a shaker but that's besides the point and very situational. Export at 44.1 and 96. You will notice that the 44.1 export sounds like shit. Comparatively. Even if you downsample the other one in Audacity to 44.1 (Joel once discussed it on a live stream, it seems to have the best algorithm for downsampling and I decided to believe him in that point).
In Reaper (love the DAW), you can export at a different resolution, FL alows it too I believe. Bitwig never could. Maybe Cubase but I didn't check.
Also I like to do that because I mainly use VSTi for instruments, not real recordings. They then get rendered at 192 too. But it always applies to effects.

As for "best converters" (these are technically cheating but oh well): You could always go StageTec TrueMatch RMC but I don't think you are going to like spending 2k$ on a single channel; although... that thing doesn't even need a preamp, you just plug your mics and instruments straight into the dac. No fucks given.

You could always go one of these routes but I think that once you have your hands on something as good-performing as a fireface 800 (with the proper Firewire Card (if yours doesn't work properly, I ended up with the StarTech one that has teh LSI/Agere - FW643 on it, the TI shit didn't work for me at all)) and a good pair of studio monitors (I have APS Klasik and would recommend them any day, their signature is "modern NS10 with a sub but without the sub-box"), getting going is the most important thing.
You could always add even better room treatment and a measurement mic with MathAudio RoomEQ.

But I don't know what exactly it is that you want to do...and I only have my standpoint/knowledge

Good man ternator. You answered to the best of your ability

Hi Ternator
Why you convert to 44.1 on your Mac or Pc !!!!!!
- Every pro that i know does an analog conversion with their CD Recorders after doing an analog summing of course.
- In my case I use the TASCAM CD-RW900mkII and no matter what software you will try you wont reach the quality of the analog recorder
- Analog summing > Printing > Digital summing
- For the VRS-8 i was exited at first But after testing it Vs the UAD Apollo 8p , the UAD one wins by far cuz the SLATE's is incredibly clean but the Apollo pre just sits in this mix a lot better

I think of that as a myth. Effectively, you are outputting from your DAC into the shitty and jitter-ridden ADC of your CD-recorder. Maybe if you feed it ADAT/SPDIF/MADI from a proper ADC like lavry gold or some shit, then you might get a better result than what happens in Audacity but if you aren't using external mastering grade ADCs you are wasting time and quality.
Also, I have heard the 308. They are a bit tiring (as in harsh highs which may piss you off for the day after working for 2-4 hours) and a bit hyped. The difference in detail between 308 and Klasik is earth-sun-distance-scale. The "Waveguide from M2" shit is just marketing. Everyone knows that if you just 1:1 scale down something like that and it has to do with air (wind or sound) it is going to have completely different properties. But I must admit they sounded better + less hyped than Yamaha HS8. And in that <500$ category they might very well be tough to beat.
If you need to get going, buy them. If you can not afford them right now buy a cheap measurement mic and MathAudio RoomEQ. Can not recommend it enough. Then save up a bit and get Klasiks to get your ears and mind blown.

Hi again Ternator
First thx for replaying with this rich knowledge below
You are completely right about all i think and just to be clear in my case the 308 is my second monitors after a very bad experience with the KRK shit "sorry about that" my main monitors are the kinoshita wrap 5 and i realy spend too much on it and really the kinoshita are just perfect that i can spend 8 hours mixing without "ear fatigue"

I forget to mention that i use the Dangerous Music 2-BUS+ for the analog summing and im very satisfied
the sonic benefits of analog summing is really huge "punch , clarity , stereo separation , depth , width , dimension"

analogue will be analogue lol
And especially such great stuff as Dangerous Music, I believe you that it makes a huge difference.
That thing even has transformers <3 <3
currently I'm saving up for a APS Sub10, then APS Trinity (their midfields).
Dunno when but I will probably have to get the Slate VRS-8 before.
Then some Distressors (although the EL Arousor does sound incredible too so I'll be with that for a while (RIP my CPU)) and Moog stuff. Oh, and eventually some Dangerous Music stuff.

Oh yeah the APS stuff is very good i have a friend that bought the trinity 2 months ago and i heard them in his studio and really they are amazing
- For the VRS-8 i tested it and it sound too plastic to my ears and like i said before to me the UAD Apollo sound more intresting and it's not the best in the market but finally it's all about taste.
I just recommend to you to test a couple of sound-cards and then decide which one you will choose.
Finally i wish you the best luck in the business , have a nice day man.
P.S If i can help then PM me at any time , i was helped for 10 years by friends and people from around the net that i wish that can did the same.

thanx m8! and I also wish you the best of success!
but yeah, preference is key when the quality is good enough anyways.
the reason i'm so interested in the VRS-8 is native PCIe (so no CPU overhead but Thunderbolt does that too), good converters and good pres
Were you at NAMM?? Like, I thought they just anounced the thing...
And what do you mean with "plastic"? In my mind that would be the low-end being weird and inconsistent but how coud they fuck that up, it's still 2k$ lol.
I'm interested to hear

Hi again Ternator
Yes i was in NAMM and it was amazing and the only bad news was "Trump is the president" .....
For the plastic sound its some sort of vst flatness that you can feel when you listen to the VRS-8 pre-amp the sound is incredibly clean that you won't focus on any flavor of sounds and this is really a very big problem.
i can give you another example of plastic sound : IK Multimedia SampleTank sounds are very very clean and they are useless

Cheers ini. I have it now working on my other windows 7 system which is higher spec so it was conflicts or lack of something on the older system. All the Best

Good!!!
Enjoy!