Btw. I don't like that harsh and cold sound I get since I installed Windows 7.
I think I will set up an old Win95 machine for that good old warm vintage vibes it gives me
Nah! Win 95 was too wrapped up with 16 bit sampling. I don't think they got that earthy analogue glue-iness until Win 98 came along.......
Oh c'mon people - this is the 100500th thread on this subject, and it's beginning to get somewhat boring. I want to propose the following:
1) Listening tests of DAWs - the key word here is "listening".
Nobody cares what you think, you either hear it or you don't.
2) Answers should be strictly limited to "I hear the difference and I prefer X" or "I don't hear any difference". Ears are the only and the ultimate judge of sound.
3) Any attempts to explan the theory behind the differences in sound, or scientific reason for lack thereof are attempts to derail the thread and have to be immediately deleted. It is of course, a noble pursuit, but should be separated into a different thread. Words like "null test" "summing engine" etc. are prohibited regardless of context. Don't get me wrong - I love theory and math as much as the next person, or probably more, but it's important to distinguish the two approaches.
Oh c'mon people - this is the 100500th thread on this subject, and it's beginning to get somewhat boring. I want to propose the following:
1) Listening tests of DAWs - the key word here is "listening".
listening tests are meaningless if the people involved are peeking at the screen
they are also meaningless if people have erred in matching the settings of both DAWs
how can somebody say "the DAW" or its "summing engine" is causing the difference if the operator did not match the volumes and pan laws and so on?
Quote:
Nobody cares what you think, you either hear it or you don't.
the correct construction is: "Nobody cares what you THINK you can hear. You can either prove you can hear it with a blindfold on, or you can't"
Quote:
2) Answers should be strictly limited to "I hear the difference and I prefer X" or "I don't hear any difference". Ears are the only and the ultimate judge of sound.
as above, if you are not double-blind, you are NOT "using your ears" you are using your eyes. I am not impressed with people "passing" a test that a Deaf Person with good eyesight can ALSO pass!
Quote:
Don't get me wrong - I love theory and math as much as the next person, or probably more, but it's important to distinguish the two approaches.
Incorrect. It is 100% relevant to "listening". Because if 2 files null, they are exactly the same, NOBODY can "hear the difference" EVER.
This includes Hans Zimmer.
__________________
.
“What you ask about is music. What you like is sound. Now music and sound are akin, but they are not the same.”
— Confucius
Oh c'mon people - this is the 100500th thread on this subject, and it's beginning to get somewhat boring. I want to propose the following:
1) Listening tests of DAWs - the key word here is "listening".
Nobody cares what you think, you either hear it or you don't.
2) Answers should be strictly limited to "I hear the difference and I prefer X" or "I don't hear any difference". Ears are the only and the ultimate judge of sound.
3) Any attempts to explan the theory behind the differences in sound, or scientific reason for lack thereof are attempts to derail the thread and have to be immediately deleted. It is of course, a noble pursuit, but should be separated into a different thread. Words like "null test" "summing engine" etc. are prohibited regardless of context. Don't get me wrong - I love theory and math as much as the next person, or probably more, but it's important to distinguish the two approaches.
Yeah, forbid the only reliable method for backing any claims and start a disussion about fairy dust. The thing is: Nobody cares what you imagine to hear, so if the only proper method of detecting differences is forbidden, then only double blind tests should count and anyone who hasn't done one in a controlled environment, should shut up and be silent for ever in return.
3) Any attempts to explain the theory behind the differences in sound, or scientific reason for lack thereof are attempts to derail the thread and have to be immediately deleted. It is of course, a noble pursuit, but should be separated into a different thread.
I agree that 99% of people start with this kind of talk and have no clue what they are talking about and it just leads to nonsense.
Quote:
Words like "null test" "summing engine" etc. are prohibited regardless of context.
The null test is something quite different to the above techno babble nonsense. In fact it is quite the opposite. It is a simple and practical test to check if two audio files are identical or not. It can check whether you are imagining tiny differences (which is very easy to do) or not. So don't lump it together with the "summing engine floating point algorithm blah blah" stuff. The null test cuts through all of that and shows the truth. In one test someone did they accidentally had a track panned 99> instead of 100>. It produced a difference file of -88db (as opposed to -144db which is silence in 24 bit land). There is no way anyone I know could reliably tell 99> from 100> just by listening. The null test picks up ANY difference. If you're not sure what it is then do a search and look it up. Then you will have a way of telling who is talking rubbish when they say they can "hear a difference".
Real life story : Just the other day, I used it in a practical way. I was running Ableton into Pro Tools via Rewire and I had some identical files in each DAW (drums I was trying to stretch). When they played together, they sounded odd. I took one file, level matched them and tried to cancel them by inverting polarity on one track. They didn't cancel. After a while I discovered that nudging the PT file by 2 samples later they cancelled. So I discovered that Ableton runs 2 samples behind Pro Tools when they are rewired together (irrespective of buffer size). I have no idea why but I'm glad I know. All thanks to the null test!
(And yes, Ableton nulls with Pro Tools!)
__________________
Haven't thought of a good line yet.
After this thread if Mr. Zimmer continues to use Cubase they'll be a warrant for his arrest. Lol
Sent from my MOTWX435KT using Tapatalk
Long time ago I asked from HZ that when he is gonna change to Logic. He said that he wont see sense doing on this when the app has stalled on its development. And that was years ago
And as the previous folks mentioned, they use also Pro Tools heavily at Remote.
The null test is something quite different to the above techno babble nonsense. In fact it is quite the opposite. It is a simple and practical test to check if two audio files are identical or not. It can check whether you are imagining tiny differences (which is very easy to do) or not. So don't lump it together with the "summing engine floating point algorithm blah blah" stuff. The null test cuts through all of that and shows the truth. In one test someone did they accidentally had a track panned 99> instead of 100>. It produced a difference file of -88db (as opposed to -144db which is silence in 24 bit land). There is no way anyone I know could reliably tell 99> from 100> just by listening. The null test picks up ANY difference. If you're not sure what it is then do a search and look it up. Then you will have a way of telling who is talking rubbish when they say they can "hear a difference".
Exactly.
And if a digital null test is still too "cold-analytical-scientific-magical-stuff" for you, joust route the master busses of the two DAWs you want to compare to your analog console, match levels and pan law, switch polarity of the two stereo channels of one of the DAWs and listen to the resulting signal which would represent the difference between the two.
Nah! Win 95 was too wrapped up with 16 bit sampling. I don't think they got that earthy analogue glue-iness until Win 98 came along.......
Don't be surprised when Avid claim they've stayed 32 bit longer than anyone else,cause it had that vintage/analog vibe,and well,since they're the "industry standard",maybe PT going 64 bit could be a mistake!
For the sake of clarity Hanz Zimmer doesn't mix in Cubase he composers in it as far as I know, he has a Pro Tools set up for transfers.
Yes, Hans has also a huge PT-Rig but this does not mean that it is always in use. Just for the record, the music for latest Sherlock Holmes was completely written AND mixed in Cubase.
__________________ Everything is amazing right now and nobody is happy
Long time ago I asked from HZ that when he is gonna change to Logic. He said that he wont see sense doing on this when the app has stalled on its development. And that was years ago
And as the previous folks mentioned, they use also Pro Tools heavily at Remote.
I too use Cubase why because I prefer to. It's has a good work flow and it sounds great. I also have Logic and Protools because I sometime get media in those formats. My personal opinion is that they are all good but I just prefer using Cubase. Clients love the results and I get no complaints. I have made in money way over what I invested in these programs. Hanz Zimmer as well as other successful composer don't have time too debate on what's the best gear or daw and software. They are to busy completing deadlines of work that continues to amaze the world.
Why is everyone referring to Hans Zimmer all the time? His music blows
He is the ruler of Cubase users. They bow down to him. They are his b*tches.
Actually he also said in an interview that he could tell music that was made in Cubase because it has a certain sound, so what does he know??? He probably doesn't have time to do a null test, but he could get some of his minions to do it.
Why is everyone referring to Hans Zimmer all the time? His music blows
it's an in-joke
From a previous thread, now closed, where someone cited Hans Zimmer as his argument-from-authority:
Apparently Hans can hear the 'harshness' or whatever it is from Logic every time, and it was implied he could listen to a dozen files and tell you which three were done in Logic and which three were done in Cubase
So, just another source of endless amusement here, a sly reference to all the golden ear claims that we are still waiting to see performed in front of witnesses.
Well he is not my ruler and I'm sure everyone who has credited him to Cubase feels the same way. As far as us being his bitches you must be confused. I think you should watch less porn while creating your music because you might ware out your small instrument.
Well he is not my ruler and I'm sure everyone who has credited him to Cubase feels the same way. As far as us being his bitches you must be confused. I think you should watch less porn while creating your music because you might ware out your small instrument.
Sent from my MOTWX435KT using Tapatalk
Wow! You took that seriously??
I was just playing! No need to be offended. Cubase is lovely with no nasty top end and I'm sure you're not Hans Zimmer's bitch.
I even used to use Cubase many years ago, although that was Cubase 2 on the Atari in the late 1980s. I heard they have added some more features since then.
As usual, these threads add nothing positive to the audio community, I vote it gets locked before we have yet another mud fight.
I think this one was mercifully short. I saw one the other day which had 15 pages of crap. The whole sound of the DAW thing got squashed pretty fast and we got down to the Zimmerfest.
That other thread had nothing about Zimmer at all. Nothing.
I was just playing! No need to be offended. Cubase is lovely with no nasty top end and I'm sure you're not Hans Zimmer's bitch.
I even used to use Cubase many years ago, although that was Cubase 2 on the Atari in the late 1980s. I heard they have added some more features since then.
Well I thought you were being rude and personally I don't think this is worth a fight. I think we all have something great to offer. I have met brilliant people on gearslutz not to mention I have learned alot. So yeah I'm done my friend. So back to the subject CUBASE RULES MAN! Lol. Naw just kidding As I said before I use other daws aswell and they all work great for me.
I think there's a business opportunity here for us programmer types:
A new suite of plugins to get your favorite DAW sound out of ANOTHER DAW !!
Of course all the latest would be represented as well as Atari based Notator for that vintage 1176-like vibe and perhaps even original Steinberg for that German U47 thing.
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
you are using your eyes. I am not impressed with people "passing" a test that a Deaf Person with good eyesight can ALSO pass! 
