Sample rate conversion problems with cubase 9.5

A common task with daws is to convert different sample rates. Someone in Canada did a test how different daw’s and audio software handle this task. It seems to quite bad result for cubase compared to newer version of protools, logic etc.

Check it out your self:

Some of the free-ware daws like ardour does this about 24 dB better than cubase 9.5 (and its predecessors) and the really good one like izotope is at least 60 dB better than cubase with this test.

Please read their FAQ:

Are most SRCs really that bad?
No. If you look at the decibel scale to the right from the graphs, you can see that the range of these graphs is very wide: down to -180 dB. The distortions generated by most properly designed SRCs are below -100 dB and can hardly create audible artifacts. However SRCs differ in the transition band of the low-pass filter and in the amount of pre-/post-echo and aliasing. The bottom line is that most tested SRCs range from fairly good to excellent, but the graphs are very sensitive to emphasize the differences.

In other words, the results are intentionally greatly exaggerated to make the difference between sample rate conversion algorithms more obvious. If they didn’t do that, most of the graphs would look nearly identical.

Cubase doesn’t have the best sample rate conversion around, but its quality is still pretty good and it introduces far less aliasing than using 48000Hz libraries in 44100hz projects with any sampler for example, which a lot of people do. It’s completely inaudible in 99% of the cases and a bit of low cut makes it pretty much disappear.

Too bad that Steinberg accept to fairly good and not excellent, cubase artefacts is about -120 dBfs witch is about what a very good DA can handle. And since cubase is intended to used for change the content it needs good margins. 12 dB EQ and 20 dB compression you are in audible area. If you then adds modulation effects and non linearity processing you get degrades. At least I expect Cubase be among the best for any audio processing task.

No music has -6dB signals above ~15kHz, and certainly not anywhere near or above Nyquist. The low aliasing levels shown by these tests are even lower with actual musical content.

You’re probably not too concerned about sound quality if you’re consistently compressing and EQing the bejesus out of your tracks like that, but you would be boosting more of the noise floor present in the recording (more high frequency content, more audible even at lower levels) than any aliasing. Even with those settings, the aliasing is likely inaudible even with the track soloed.

But don’t worry because there’s no way Steinberg missed how many people have complained about this, so the SRC algorithm is definitely going to be changed at some point. But it’s seriously not a big deal.

A little late to the party but just wanted to confirm the other users comments.

I have been having problems with cubase introducing very audible artifacts when exporting 44.1k files from a 48k project. Which by the way is making me look like a fool in the eyes of my client.

The material is minimalistic piano, recorded only with MIDI libraries. When sending the files for mastering they send them back saying that the mastering compression is making undesirable noise pop up.

Problem was fixed instantly importing the MIDI files into Pro Tools and reprinting them (same 48k project, 44.1k audio files). Same libraries, same plugins with the same processing.

Made another test, exporting audio files at 48k from cubase, and importing them into Izotope Ozone only for downsampling to 44.1k. Resulting files are crystal clean, no noise or artefacts to be found.

This is quite enfuriating considering the price of the software. 2018 by the way.

My old subject(some pics on results with RMAA):!Auw5dk599Qm6gR-fZfO7mmQ_HXUy

I tested above with RMAA and found disturbing truth about Cubase, still in 9.5. This was done in 9.0 then.
Curves are Cubase, old 8.5 Sonar, R8brain and original testpattern in RMAA.

Really interesting to hear that it would actually be audible at export as well - thanks tosivdh.
I merely assumed that at import it would be a real problem, since it might be magnified by your own processing until final mix.

It could be that 48k->44k is audible, I did as Infinite wave and did 96k->44k.

Either way, I use Voxengo R8brain free version - which also has magnificent results on infinitewave site.
Reaper has improved their algorithms every a couple of dot versions.
But Steinberg Cubase remain the same for 10 years - regarding Cubase that is, WaveLab is among the better.

But really nice in 9.5 was 64-bit audio engine - so I think SRC might be there in C10.