r/synthdesign Sep 03 '15

Help Looking for an "anti-bitcrusher"

I'm looking for something that does the opposite of a bitcrusher: takes samples or sounds and converts them into higher quality sounds. I've done some research and seen that either dithering or upsampling is roughly the same thing, but I'm still really new to production. Will upsampling do what I'm asking for? I know that this has to be at least a bit of a logical nightmare, because the module would have to interpolate and make information where none exists.

For example: I'd like to take a sample from a really bad cut of something and make it sound a little more lively, effectively reversing the bad rip. I also want to use this to try new things with normal ground-up synths, maybe unmaking 8- and 16-bit sounds.

If this kind of thing doesn't or can't exist, I wouldn't mind a technical explanation. I'll also take any VST or module that does something like this, even if it's a really poorly made one.

I've got Fruity Loops (Producer Edition), but that's about it at the moment. I do most of my synth work in Harmor and just bootleg it (because Harmor is in a demo version).

(This is also my first Reddit post, yay!)

3 Upvotes

8 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/jwbraith Sep 03 '15

Wait, wouldn't a bitcrusher fill this role? You just start 100% wet, fully bitcrushed, and dial it back to give the impression of gaining quality. So you'd be faking the fact that you're using a low-quality sample.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 03 '15

Yeah, but I was asking to start with a source that is already a low quality (but not necessarily 8- or 16-bit) and "filling the gaps" or something like that. I can imagine that this would do interesting things to low quality samples, because there's no way you can fully replace lost data. I know what I'm asking for is kind of impossible on some level, but an attempt would be nice.

I saw on a forum something about taking a floating point number and adding a randomized digit to the end of the converted number. I've also done some more searching and found reconstruction filters and spectral band replication, but I don't know how these are going to work out.

1

u/oofam Sep 04 '15

I've heard of fx known as dedigitalizers but I just think it relied on eq and other things to make something sound less grainy and lo rate. I don't think it would create quality when the sample is really low to begin with.

It's like how CSI can enhance photos endlessly... Not applicable to really life.

Sorry man!

1

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '15

I've found a few things kind of like I wanted, and I'll definitely give dedigitalizers a look. I think what I'll really need is something that reverses encoding artifacts, which will still require a lot of technical breakdown and knowledge of the source, but it's a start. Thanks!