Poll: Do some DAWs have superior sound? (and, are you a programmer / engineer?)

[jrhager84]

Originally Posted by DAW PLUS

If this was aimed at me: I am not claiming such a thing. Whether broken or flavored, people are looking for sound differences. I claim there is a guaranteed difference with a certain software but noone has ever claimed it for a certain version, which is different from its predecessor versions.

Thanks. I'll check if I can get my hands on one, just out of curiosity.

Please tell me you see what a fool's errand that is when you refuse to inform us of the daw. How can we substantiate or conversely refute the claim when you purposefully keep us in the dark?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

[DAW PLUS]

The only fools errand I might have made is mentioning it at all, since typically for forums, there are enough people who won't take a word no matter how credible or substanciated.

I don't want anybody to look after it, it is not a contest. I just made a point about this discussion, it does not even have anything to do with which DAW I am talking about.

If anyone feels bothered by my remark (I don't claim anything), please just ignore it and move on.

[bandorr]

Originally Posted by jrhager84

Please tell me you see what a fool's errand that is when you refuse to inform us of the daw. How can we substantiate or conversely refute the claim when you purposefully keep us in the dark?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

Because ,maybe he can't. It didn't occurred to you that he (as a turnkey daw provider) can't make such a judgement in a forum?

Btw if I'm not mistaken, that problem occurred only with the "second" master buss....(Yes, I'm REALLY interested in this subject)


Edit:Ugh.... Disregard my comment. I didn't read the whole thing....

[krheatman]

So just because the summing nulls,does not mean other factors can't exist beyond it,like below.From SOS.

"When your Pro Tools mix is finished, you'll need to export it as a stereo file. We explain why the obvious Bounce To Disk option might not be the best for you..."

Writing Final Mixes

"Especially given that Bounce To Disk isn't always completely accurate with Sessions containing heavy automation"

Like I said earlier in this thread,some people are probably hearing the same effects this creates.And you thought they were all crazy.

Why does bouncing to disk sound DIFFERENT?

Funny how summing boxes got more use after this and then DSD recorders,coincidence?I added that thread above because it was done about the same time as this article.


"At this stage I should mention a caveat concerning the use of Bounce To Disk. Much has been written on various Internet chat rooms and email distribution lists about the audio quality of stereo files produced in this way, calling into question Bounce To Disk's ability to produce a mix that sounds exactly the same as the project played in real time."

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep0...ormernotes.htm

This is from Digital Performer-
"But many times the resulting ‘bounce’ file contains errors.
It simply does not sound like the mix you’ve been working on for the past week!
Automation nodes get cut off, or CC data curves controlling VI parameters get inaccurately rendered. Maybe it’s a midi data bottleneck somewhere, who knows."

"These errors do not happen all of the time, or even the majority of the time. But it happens enough that Bounce to Disk is not 100% reliable.
And this is not unique to Digital Performer.
Over the years I’ve experienced the same problems with Logic as well."

http://www.dptips.net/2009/12/30/usi...ead-of-bounce/

[theblue1]

One of the articles cited above is about DP as it existed in 2004 and uses that article to point out problems with DP's bounce-to-disk.

At that point DP's bounce-to-disk could, according to the article, not render synths or even plug-ins in b-to-d mode.

That's not different. That's broken. Not a different flavor/sound. It's a non-functionality.

But that was also almost a decade ago. Is that functionality still broken in DP?


Ditto, the 2008 article on PT from SoS. In the 'Problems with Bouncing' section, they talk about functionalities that are broken, automation that sometimes didn't process correctly in the BtD apparently in place at that time and a number of other deal-breakers that would result in process failure. Again, that's not a different flavor or sound. That's broken. And again, while it's not directly pertinent to the 'do-DAWs-have-differet-flavors/sounds?' question, it does beg us ask: since that was almost a half decade ago, is PT still broken?

[The Aristocrat]

Originally Posted by DAW PLUS

The only fools errand I might have made is mentioning it at all, since typically for forums, there are enough people who won't take a word no matter how credible or substanciated.

I don't want anybody to look after it, it is not a contest. I just made a point about this discussion, it does not even have anything to do with which DAW I am talking about.

If anyone feels bothered by my remark (I don't claim anything), please just ignore it and move on.

I understand what you mean, out of curiosity is it possible to narrow down the search to a specific time frame, between the daw with the problem and the time that the next installment was released?

[krheatman]

Originally Posted by theblue1

One of the articles cited above is about DP as it existed in 2004 and uses that article to point out problems with DP's bounce-to-disk.

At that point DP's bounce-to-disk could, according to the article, not render synths or even plug-ins in b-to-d mode.

That's not different. That's broken. Not a different flavor/sound. It's a non-functionality.

But that was also almost a decade ago. Is that functionality still broken in DP?


Ditto, the 2008 article on PT from SoS. In the 'Problems with Bouncing' section, they talk about functionalities that are broken, automation that sometimes didn't process correctly in the BtD apparently in place at that time and a number of other deal-breakers that would result in process failure. Again, that's not a different flavor or sound. That's broken. And again, while it's not directly pertinent to the 'do-DAWs-have-differet-flavors/sounds?' question, it does beg us ask: since that was almost a half decade ago, is PT still broken?

Not my point.At some point in time people heard a difference.It is easy to say there must have been something wrong,duh.What the problem is,people are claiming to have heard a difference,and while this thread may not totally be about that,they are being dismissed when their points are still valid.At some point in time,the DAW was not reproducing what they were hearing.

You have dismissed them and tried to make them feel stupid.Don't try to write this off as saying it has nothing to do with the OP because it falls within the parameters discussed here.

If everyone at the time would have known to do a null,they would have known there was in fact something wrong with the program.But they didn't.But it makes me feel sorry for the brow beating some have taken on this thread expressing what happened at the time,thats all.

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by krheatman

You have dismissed them and tried to make them feel stupid

I know this is a response to a certain individual's certain post, but I wouldn't say that's everyone's position in this thread.

I seek knowledge, always have, always will.

So, if someone hears a difference let's first ensure there is no other stuff creeping in by verifying with a true double blind test that picks one over the other more than the statistical 50%, and send the 2 files to the good and capable folks in this thread, and I assure you, thorough investigation would soon follow.

So far that has not happened .

[krheatman]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

I know this is a response to a certain individual's certain post, but I wouldn't say that's everyone's position in this thread.

I seek knowledge, always have, always will.

So, if someone hears a difference let's first ensure there is no other stuff creeping in by verifying with a true double blind test that picks one over the other more than the statistical 50%, and send the 2 files to the good and capable folks in this thread, and I assure you, thorough investigation would soon follow.

So far that has not happened .

I agree.There may be be a bigger percentage that voted originally the way they did for this very reason is all I was getting at.And 50% of them could be hearing things also,I get that.

[FLYINGJAY]

Originally Posted by joeq

He could use code words:

when a reverb company wants to hint that their 'Large Hall' algorithm models Carnegie Hall, they name the preset "Famous Hall C" or "57th Street" or something like that.

"Practice practice practice"

Same with "British", "Liverpool", "California", and "Blonde", standing in for Marshall, Vox, Boogie, and Fender.

If he calls Cubase "The Harsh One" and Samplitude "The Dull One", everybody will know exactly which DAWs he is referring to.

I like!

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[FLYINGJAY]

Originally Posted by krheatman

So just because the summing nulls,does not mean other factors can't exist beyond it,like below.From SOS.

"When your Pro Tools mix is finished, you'll need to export it as a stereo file. We explain why the obvious Bounce To Disk option might not be the best for you..."

Writing Final Mixes

"Especially given that Bounce To Disk isn't always completely accurate with Sessions containing heavy automation"

Like I said earlier in this thread,some people are probably hearing the same effects this creates.And you thought they were all crazy.

Why does bouncing to disk sound DIFFERENT?

Funny how summing boxes got more use after this and then DSD recorders,coincidence?I added that thread above because it was done about the same time as this article.


"At this stage I should mention a caveat concerning the use of Bounce To Disk. Much has been written on various Internet chat rooms and email distribution lists about the audio quality of stereo files produced in this way, calling into question Bounce To Disk's ability to produce a mix that sounds exactly the same as the project played in real time."

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep0...ormernotes.htm

This is from Digital Performer-
"But many times the resulting ‘bounce’ file contains errors.
It simply does not sound like the mix you’ve been working on for the past week!
Automation nodes get cut off, or CC data curves controlling VI parameters get inaccurately rendered. Maybe it’s a midi data bottleneck somewhere, who knows."

"These errors do not happen all of the time, or even the majority of the time. But it happens enough that Bounce to Disk is not 100% reliable.
And this is not unique to Digital Performer.
Over the years I’ve experienced the same problems with Logic as well."

http://www.dptips.net/2009/12/30/usi...ead-of-bounce/

Ok without all the automation and continuous controller changes,the files will null right?

Well Putting the Native instruments passive eq up against the Uad massive passive eq,I know Plugins samples and other thing WITHIN daw(when using stock Plugins)will never null.

That has always been my stand point.

Or even different dithering algorithms,because some dithers have different noise shape options.

Another is daw workflow!

Using logic environments and transformers would enable one to do things that couldn't be done in other daws.

I still feel people really want to know,which daw is a magic button to fix their sucky skills.



Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[jrhager84]

Originally Posted by DAW PLUS

The only fools errand I might have made is mentioning it at all, since typically for forums, there are enough people who won't take a word no matter how credible or substanciated.

I don't want anybody to look after it, it is not a contest. I just made a point about this discussion, it does not even have anything to do with which DAW I am talking about.

If anyone feels bothered by my remark (I don't claim anything), please just ignore it and move on.

Then yes, you should have never typed a word to begin with... You've lost all credibility with me.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

[Jason West]

Originally Posted by Bunjji

A better way to accomplish this is to allow people to choose different summing algorithms for each bus. I would call the files .dsa fro digital summing algorithm. If only I could code . . . .

That's a good point to provide ultimate flexibility. So AUX1, AUX5, AUX16 could have "Cubase" emulation while AUX2, AUX,4,AUX11 has "ProTools" emulation. Different stems would have different mixdown algorithms. That makes sense.

This reminds me of something else I came across which has gone unnoticed thus far. There's this one film composer that likes to use Nuendo/Cubase to mixdown the left & right channels and ProTools to mixdown the rear left & right surround channels. If one thinks about it a little, it seems to make sense since Cubase is "tighter" which is what you want for the forward speakers (with heavy dialogue). With the more "open" sound PT offers, it's perfect for the backside ambience speakers (is my guess). I'm not exactly sure what he uses for the center channel; he probably switches back and forth depending on the film. So for a his production style with multiple DAWs, the "DAW emulator plugin" would streamline his workflow considerably. I won't say his name (wouldn't want to open up a can of worms ) but I'm sure the golden ears out there will eventually figure out who it is. (I can say it's not Hans Zimmer.)

Forget I just said all that.

[jrhager84]

I see what you did thur!

[DAW PLUS]

Originally Posted by jrhager84

Then yes, you should have never typed a word to begin with... You've lost all credibility with me.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

In that case, I am sorry you completely missed my point. I have no idea what I stated to have lost credibility. I am not in a position to make a stunt here.

[DAW PLUS]

Originally Posted by The Aristocrat

I understand what you mean, out of curiosity is it possible to narrow down the search to a specific time frame, between the daw with the problem and the time that the next installment was released?

Current release.

[jrhager84]

Originally Posted by DAW PLUS

In that case, I am sorry you completely missed my point. I have no idea what I stated to have lost credibility. I am not in a position to make a stunt here.

It's the classic 'There's info you could benefit from, but I ain't talkin'!' mentality. If you really aren't at liberty to say, you should have never even brought it into this discussion...as you should have known people would ask you to substantiate your claim.

I stand by my original position.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by krheatman

Not my point.At some point in time people heard a difference.It is easy to say there must have been something wrong,duh.What the problem is,people are claiming to have heard a difference,and while this thread may not totally be about that,they are being dismissed when their points are still valid.At some point in time,the DAW was not reproducing what they were hearing.

You have dismissed them and tried to make them feel stupid.Don't try to write this off as saying it has nothing to do with the OP because it falls within the parameters discussed here.

If everyone at the time would have known to do a null,they would have known there was in fact something wrong with the program.But they didn't.But it makes me feel sorry for the brow beating some have taken on this thread expressing what happened at the time,thats all.

How many times must one man write that he has no problems accepting the possibility that DAWs might well be constructed in such a way as to present differences in results from the same operations across multiple browsers?

(We'll put aside the very real consideration that there is a proper result for basic mixing functions -- to the extent that one considers signal accuracy important.)

I have merely maintained the very basic position that no one has demonstrated to me using credible, conclusive evidence that there are such differences in function designed into DAWs.

That is nowhere close to suggesting that those who feel there are such differences are -- by virtue of that belief -- 'stupid.'

Now, to be sure, like many here, I have expressed great frustration with the logical/rational peculiarities of some of the attempts at argument and persuasion here -- there ARE people in this thread who seem profoundly challenged at constructing and following logical arguments and many who seem to have only a marginal grip on those facilities. But, sad to say, that is pandemic in our culture.

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by jrhager84

It's the classic 'There's info you could benefit from, but I ain't talkin'!' mentality. If you really aren't at liberty to say, you should have never even brought it into this discussion...as you should have known people would ask you to substantiate your claim.

I stand by my original position.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

I can definitely understand why he might be precluded from sharing that info.

I think, however, since he wasn't at liberty to discuss the particulars, he probably should not have brought it up at all.


At any rate, his example is a particular release (apparently the current) of a specific, although unnamed, DAW which has an error in the coding that creates results inconsistent with those of prior releases.

So that is a quite different issue and one that has been widely acknowledged as both a possibility in differences between DAWs but also not really directly pertinent to discussion of whether DAWs are designed in such a way as to create different results from the same specific summing (and/or EQ) processes across DAWs.

[krheatman]

Who else can you make fun of?I bet the majority of humans out there have idiosyncratic behavior of some kind?People believe all kinds of wacked out stuff.And to one it seems wacked out,and to 1000 normal.

I know the science,I know people and sometimes you have to live and let live.Sometimes people don't have to know how to build a watch to figure out what time it is.And they really might not have trusted the math,if you will,after their past experience.Some have even dumped digital altogether and went back to tape.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[DAW PLUS]

(Reply to blue1 No, it indeed is a different discussion since it is a confirmed error.

I only brought it up because of this very long discussion whether one can hear the difference, or whether one can measure it with nulling tests. Since nobody noticed a certain DAW is proven (by the manufacturer) to sound different, in a way that many people claim certain DAW's sound, I thought it is very interesting.

Whether one finds out what DAW it is, is not really of interest IMO.

I wouldn't ever post deliberate nonsense in here, after all my name and company are in my signature. I have 1500+ posts in here, and almost all of them are (trying to) be informative and helpful.

If one feels I have crossed the line by bringing live evidence in the discussion without mentioning the source, I can somewhat understand that. I just hoped people would think about that situation instead of slamming on the source. But that is what happens in these DAW comparison threads. I should have known better.

End of discussion from my side. Back to the (non-)topic.

[jrhager84]

Originally Posted by DAW PLUS

(Reply to blue1 No, it indeed is a different discussion since it is a confirmed error.

I only brought it up because of this very long discussion whether one can hear the difference, or whether one can measure it with nulling tests. Since nobody noticed a certain DAW is proven (by the manufacturer) to sound different, in a way that many people claim certain DAW's sound, I thought it is very interesting.

Whether one finds out what DAW it is, is not really of interest IMO.

I wouldn't ever post deliberate nonsense in here, after all my name and company are in my signature. I have 1500+ posts in here, and almost all of them are (trying to) be informative and helpful.

If one feels I have crossed the line by bringing live evidence in the discussion without mentioning the source, I can somewhat understand that. I just hoped people would think about that situation instead of slamming on the source. But that is what happens in these DAW comparison threads. I should have known better.

End of discussion from my side. Back to the (non-)topic.

Typical backpedaling... You should have known better? What a passive aggressive response!

You brought a flippant comment with ZERO evidence into this discussion. What did you think was going to happen? We could think about a million variables, but it doesn't matter. They're extenuating circumstances; statistical anomalies. I mean, someone could have a bad install of one daw. Bad drivers, etc etc... Bringing up a 'broken' daw's summing engine has literally no relevance to this thread. Don't let the door hit you on the way out...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

[FLYINGJAY]

Originally Posted by DAW PLUS

(Reply to blue1 No, it indeed is a different discussion since it is a confirmed error.

I only brought it up because of this very long discussion whether one can hear the difference, or whether one can measure it with nulling tests. Since nobody noticed a certain DAW is proven (by the manufacturer) to sound different, in a way that many people claim certain DAW's sound, I thought it is very interesting.

Whether one finds out what DAW it is, is not really of interest IMO.

I wouldn't ever post deliberate nonsense in here, after all my name and company are in my signature. I have 1500+ posts in here, and almost all of them are (trying to) be informative and helpful.

If one feels I have crossed the line by bringing live evidence in the discussion without mentioning the source, I can somewhat understand that. I just hoped people would think about that situation instead of slamming on the source. But that is what happens in these DAW comparison threads. I should have known better.

End of discussion from my side. Back to the (non-)topic.

Indeed valid as is plugin stacking aux buss latency.


As dsp Plugins are added latency increase and need compensation.

Cubase does not need this special treatment compared to logic and protools(non HD).

Although cubase latency does come into play with dsp Plugins in the master buss.but its global,so individual tracks remain in perfect phase.

I think timing is a big deal.




Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by DAW PLUS

(Reply to blue1 No, it indeed is a different discussion since it is a confirmed error.

I only brought it up because of this very long discussion whether one can hear the difference, or whether one can measure it with nulling tests. Since nobody noticed a certain DAW is proven (by the manufacturer) to sound different, in a way that many people claim certain DAW's sound, I thought it is very interesting.

Whether one finds out what DAW it is, is not really of interest IMO.

I wouldn't ever post deliberate nonsense in here, after all my name and company are in my signature. I have 1500+ posts in here, and almost all of them are (trying to) be informative and helpful.

If one feels I have crossed the line by bringing live evidence in the discussion without mentioning the source, I can somewhat understand that. I just hoped people would think about that situation instead of slamming on the source. But that is what happens in these DAW comparison threads. I should have known better.

End of discussion from my side. Back to the (non-)topic.

I get you.

One question I have on this specific sidebar discussion -- and understood if you can't get into details -- is the flaw something that appears in ALL cases or is it something that only manifests under a certain set of related conditions?

[FLYINGJAY]

Originally Posted by SabreChris

This debate rages on many forums. Do some DAWs have an inherently better sound, or do null tests, human bias, (and quality of plug ins).

Quality of plugins!!!!!

BINGO!!!!!!

Sent from my AT100 using Tapatalk

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by FLYINGJAY

[...]

I think timing is a big deal.

Me, too.

And that is one place where, in the past at least, a lot of systems have, indeed, been 'broken' -- in the sense that the driver and host DAW are not able to get new tracks to align on the timeline with previously recorded tracks. (ie, they fail a loopback timeline alignment test).

The DAW-ware I've used since late '96 (Cakewalk/Sonar) did not have a proper way of adjusting for such timeline misalignment until version 6, I believe, which came out in 2006. Up until then, if your driver didn't report an accurate conversion latency, there was no way (besides nudging on an individual basis!) of adjusting for that.

At that point there were a couple of DAWs that did have timeline alignment adjustment options (Cubase and Mackie's long-semi-lost Tracktion among them)... but when I prodded a number of people across platforms to test for timeline alignment, every person (out of maybe 12 or 15) who actually reported results reported some degree of misalignment. (Except for one person who gave me the impression he didn't really understand what he was doing.)

I'd like to believe that this timeline alignment issue is one which is solidly behind us at this point a half decade later -- but, honestly, unless you test, you may not realize it. (My then new FW setup was a whopping 8 ms off. I hadn't noticed it when doing some vocals -- but the instant I tried to record a percussion part and listened back, I thought, wait a sec, this whole thing is off. I didn't see how that could be, since the DAW promised 'full latency compensation' -- but it was, indeed, the case.

And THAT makes a very real difference. You may not notice it right away if it's not as extreme, but that lack of time alignment precision can mount, as more and more tracks are added to the project and as musicians start taking rhythmic cues off of newer tracks that are actually misplaced on the timeline.


This has been a very real issue -- and yet, with few exceptions, I've seen precious little engagement with it or interest in it from most folks. It strikes me as... interesting given some of these other teapot tempests that often seem to be about imagined problems.

[DAW PLUS]

It appears at all circumstances. My customer did a series of comparisons with earlier versions before we contacted the manufacturer, and it was audible and clearly not nulling. No plugins involved. This is why the developers jumped on it straight away.

I still don't think this is a side discussion. While a development flaw by itself is not the topic at hand here, the resulting sound difference, as people have been trying to prove as a "sound difference" between DAW's, is. And even more if it is obvious, but not being discussed AT ALL.
I really wonder why we have this long thread among many others, people still arguing whether there are differences, whether they can be heard, or whether a nulling test is empirical proof, when this situation with this certain DAW must have popped up with bells and whistles in this and other forums.

So: even though a difference is there, in the order one can expect it if DAW's would sound different, it is unlikely many people would hear it.

[chk23]

Originally Posted by FLYINGJAY

Quality of plugins!!!!!

BINGO!!!!!!

Sent from my AT100 using Tapatalk

Yes - but what gearslut still uses the stock plugins of his DAW when there are are so many magical "make it sound good" plugins to gather out there?

[SmoothVibe]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

If you want to have this discussion, can you please start your own thread, and take flying jay with you?!

We're not talking plugins. We're not talking what feeling you get from an interface. No-one is debating these things are different. No-one had to use the included plugs.

We're talking pure, simple summing and if you want to bring your personal experience, lack of experience (PT is super stable in the hands of a pro!) and perception into it, you're just muddying the waters and adding noise. This is not the thread for that. Go start your own over which DAW makes you feel happiest!

If you can't detach personal opinion from cold hard fact, how can you ever have a meaningful debate?

Since I'm a person I color my discussion with personal opinion. Just as valid as your view is, so is mine and the view of other GS members as well. This is about learning to include and support others, about respecting GS policies.

[FLYINGJAY]

It can't be discussed here as I was band for stating my opinions on daw differences,but if you don't bandwagon the 'sum engine' topic,then your out cast by the 5-7 gs TROLLS that magically appear in this type of thread.

I was just told a few pages back that of topic,oh yea let's beat the summing dead horse again,how fun!

Literally ready novels on threads like this only to find nothing was actually said.nothing the casual gs reader can grab from something from.

Circles of tail chasing around the water dish while thirsty in plan sight to those who have good sense to notice.

leaving the gullible mind victimized for enlightenment.


Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk