Is there a sound difference in various DAW's ?

[allencollins]

Originally Posted by kvibeproduction

There's a reason why Pro tools cost so much besides the hardware...

Yeah cuz there are lots of suckers out there and Digi knows it....... PT is a joke. It's an average DAW by todays standards. Their
hardware is below average.

If PT is so sophisticated why is it so much slower than Nuendo or even Reaper? Even with DSP PT HD still chokes after intserting only limited plugin counts in a session. PT's A/D D/A is not even close to mid level units like HEDD or UA2192.


PT cost more because they know people will buy it just for the name. They are just gouging and cashing in. And suckers keep falling for the hype.

[Dean Roddey]

To be fair, it's not because people are stupid. It's because it's a standard in pro studios and interoperability (of content and skill sets) is important in the pro world.

But, yeh, in terms of their summing engine and whatnot, they aren't anything particularly great. And, unless they come out pretty soon with a new set of boards with much faster chips, they'll become kind of like the high end UAD, with the boards being basically dongles for the software or something. For folks doing the tradtional scenarios of tracking audio and then mixing, a quad core machine these days can carry a huge load. And with the upcoming new CPUs and chip sets in the PC world, the performance is going to continue to shoot up fast.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by allencollins

Yeah cuz there are lots of suckers out there and Digi knows it....... PT is a joke. It's an average DAW by todays standards. Their
hardware is below average.

If PT is so sophisticated why is it so much slower than Nuendo or even Reaper? Even with DSP PT HD still chokes after intserting only limited plugin counts in a session. PT's A/D D/A is not even close to mid level units like HEDD or UA2192.


PT cost more because they know people will buy it just for the name. They are just gouging and cashing in. And suckers keep falling for the hype.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by Dean Roddey

To be fair, it's not because people are stupid. It's because it's a standard in pro studios and interoperability (of content and skill sets) is important in the pro world.

But, yeh, in terms of their summing engine and whatnot, they aren't anything particularly great. And, unless they come out pretty soon with a new set of boards with much faster chips, they'll become kind of like the high end UAD, with the boards being basically dongles for the software or something. For folks doing the tradtional scenarios of tracking audio and then mixing, a quad core machine these days can carry a huge load. And with the upcoming new CPUs and chip sets in the PC world, the performance is going to continue to shoot up fast.

I won't be risking tracking the LSO any time soon on Reaper and a Quad core MAC - thanks all the same.

[oceantracks]

Originally Posted by narcoman

I won't be risking tracking the LSO any time soon on Reaper and a Quad core MAC - thanks all the same.

I'm very pro Native, but I'm with you there.

TH

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by oceantracks

I'm very pro Native, but I'm with you there.

TH

yeah - the point being.... some of the blanket statements made around here don't necessarily take into account the fact that every scenario is different. Shouting "PT is crap" is just a completely stupid thing to say.

PT HD has it's area, Nuendo too. As do all of the others. It's down to what you want to use and what you do. If you're me... then you use PT HD, RADAR and Nuendo quite a bit.
If you're my business partner you use Logic.

Of course native systems are perfectly capable. Much work is done on them! As is PT HD and Sadie and other DSP systems. They all do the job perfectly well - pick your system on your requirements.

[feck]

Originally Posted by narcoman

yeah - the point being.... some of the blanket statements made around here don't necessarily take into account the fact that every scenario is different. Shouting "PT is crap" is just a completely stupid thing to say.

PT HD has it's area, Nuendo too. As do all of the others. It's down to what you want to use and what you do. If you're me... then you use PT HD, RADAR and Nuendo quite a bit.
If you're my business partner you use Logic.

Of course native systems are perfectly capable. Much work is done on them! As is PT HD and Sadie and other DSP systems. They all do the job perfectly well - pick your system on your requirements.

Totally agree. At this point, any time spent arguing which is "better" intrinsically is a waste of time - figuring out which is better for the individual, now that is all that matters. When I do a large tracking session, PT is great. When I do extensive MIDI editing, Nuendo is great. When I want to track a Revalver MKIII at 32 samples in hi-res alongside BFD with 12 kit pieces loaded and have no hiccups, Logic 8 is great. As a boutique digital production studio, I don't have the need to have full PT tracking ability for most of my records, so I don't own an HD rig. But when I need one, I most definitely see its advantages.

[Fredrik]

Originally Posted by kvibeproduction

BTW, 48 bit and 32 bit.....very different on how things get approached and how things get dithered down. Just read the white papers......

That paper has been around for some years now and there are some threads about it all ready. The paper doesn´t compare fixed vs floating point, infact its not mentioned once. It only explains how the mixer in PT works. Im not sure what you are trying to prove here and how that would relate to the cost of PT that you mentioned in your previous post.

[Lynn Fuston]

Originally Posted by allencollins

Even with DSP PT HD still chokes after intserting only limited plugin counts in a session.

BS ALERT.

Total BS.

[MarkusColeman]

I've switched to Reaper some time ago.

because of the better sound? hmmm, maybe.

but what I really like is the EYE CANDY
Justin wrote WinAmp and you can use WinAmp's visualization plug ins in Reaper.

looks nice on the 42"

[neilwilkes]

Originally Posted by Sk106

I would assume the differences are redundant. (this is assuming without the usage of the plug-ins that came with the DAW application).
People say Reason and Orion have a sound of their own though - haven't tried it myself.

If there would be audiable differences, I would suggest they would come out the most with large track counts and plenty of conversion and/or editing and plugs.

A few canadians guys, calls themselves "infinate wave", did some pretty serious testing of this on a purely techical level. They published their results online - and even made a snazzy interface to look at it through. The test was based purely on software performance, and targeted downsampling a 96 khz rising sine tone to 44,1 khz within many hosts - noting aliasing problems and other things. I'm not sure how valid it is or how one might interpret it to the best way. For example, it seems Logic 8 got a worse result from being run on osx Tiger than osx Leopard. Assuming things like that is a true representation of the SRC of different hosts, it was a bit of an eyeopener to me. (especially since I'm on Steinberg software and it got pretty low score - bastards)

SRC Comparisons

That is to do with SRC, not DAW summing/Sound.
Which is a completely different thing altogether.