Samplitude sound quality

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by kruegger

For all you Samplitude die hards who look down on other DAWs or think that Samplitude sounds better than other DAWs such as Cubase,

No one is looking down on any other DAW platform, all gear choices are a personal thing. What I have a problem with with is self appointed "experts" declaring, without any debate that everything in the digital world sounds the same.

Anyone with more than an hour or two of experience in the field knows that it's not true.

Mark

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by monomer

If you feed a studer a signal it will get recorded to tape after being influenced by the circuit inside the recorder, the head alignment, the temperature, the humidity, atmosphere in general, mechanical noise, drive instability, the make of the tape, the age of the tape, the actual quality of the batch of tape, the quality of tape on any given bit on the reel, etc, etc ,etc.

Computer audio is influenced by non-absolute things, like clocking (jitter), buffer size selection, interface selection, A/D and D/A conversion, DAW pan pots and volume controls and plugins. The more you talk about absolutes, the more you risk looking like a dictator.

Mark

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by winrar

whatever... sure bad language is no good, but insulting teachers is worst....

back to our subject...

last night we recorded the whole band live, in real world
we recorded in to two different DAWs at the same time.
anyone who stills claims that, they hear any difference, especially samp users
they are nothing but just fools....
sorry guys but thats the way its...

More absolutes and bravado without anything to back it up except your "word".

Can anyone image this loud mouth kid at one of their sessions?

Didn't think so.

Recording audio is one thing, playing it back and mixing audio in a DAW is another thing entirely.

Respect goes along way, my friend. You will find out soon enough when your removed from the protection of your close minded views.

Let's hear some audio of your real world recording session.

Mark

[laser]

Originally Posted by mplancke

No one is looking down on any other DAW platform, all gear choices are a personal thing. What I have a problem with is with self appointed experts declaring without any debate that everything in the digital world sounds the same.

Anyone with more than an hour or two of experience in the field knows that it's not true.

Mark

Mark, they don't get it--they never will get it.

It's really quite simple:
1) The definitive test was (and still is) the one done by Lynn Fuston, which shows summing 22 channels of a single signal nulls or closely nulls where you can't hear a difference. It's a fact. I don't know why people have a problem with this.

2) Lynn's test is very limited. It does not accurately simulate the countless variables involved in a real mixing environment. Lynn readily acknowledges this as does most experienced mixers. It the compu-geek novices that pull out the null test and comes to the conclusion that all aspects of the DAW nulls. Many of their comments clearly show they are more experienced with computers than audio. One thinks Bob O. made his comments for monetary gain--a really stupid remark for anyone who has followed Bob's career or read his posts. Another confused dither with SRC.

3) I wrote #1 and #2 (with quotes from Lynn and Bob) about 200 posts ago. They don't get it--they never will get it.

4) It's really a waste of time trying to have an objective and rational discussion on this subject.

With #4 in mind, I'm out of here.

Laser

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

I'm thinking it's you.

For someone who is starting to learn the craft, you come off as a know-it-all more often than not.

Mark

at least i already know that all major DAWs sounds the same,
at least i am capable of making proper basic tests, unlike you.
its very clear that, you are not man enough to except the reality of DAWs...

who are those well trusted guys say that they hear difference in DAWs...
i am so curious... if technically associating with the value zero " NULL " means
in real world, you cant hear anything.

may be 25 ago, while DAWs were so premature, possible to have difference., i have no idea.

do you know what year we are living
FYI, in real world its 2009

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

Anyone with more than an hour or two of experience in the field knows that it's not true.

Mark

ehhee,

we listened to such comments owners mixes, and they all sounds like F***

no one with decent production skills so far, claimed such thing...

you wanna be people, keep dreaming about your samp, in your dream world.

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

No one is looking down on any other DAW platform, all gear choices are a personal thing. What I have a problem with with is self appointed "experts" declaring, without any debate that everything in the digital world sounds the same.

Anyone with more than an hour or two of experience in the field knows that it's not true.

Mark

you dont even know what you saying....


what is the meaning of my DAW sounds better than your, you lemon.....

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

Computer audio is influenced by non-absolute things, like clocking (jitter), buffer size selection, interface selection, A/D and D/A conversion, DAW pan pots and volume controls and plugins. The more you talk about absolutes, the more you risk looking like a dictator.

Mark

this is the most stupid post of yours,,,,,
you won a week holiday in 2009, in real world, when you came back from your dream world.


since when, AD/DA jitter, interface etc got anything to to do with the actual DAW...

DAW only takes given value, and calculates your entered values.

no wonder you insult teachers...
lack of understanding your own language....

[monomer]

Originally Posted by mplancke

Computer audio is influenced by non-absolute things, like clocking (jitter), buffer size selection, interface selection, A/D and D/A conversion, DAW pan pots and volume controls and plugins.

Buffer size seems an odd one out. Depends realy on what you're doing and how.
Definitely dont agree on the pan, volume and plug remark.
My point being exactly that they will reproduce the same effect every single time (unless designed not to).

This is why null tests have some value.

But we are straying.
My remarks were about DAWs in particular, that is, already digitized by the AD stage and before being output to the DA stage.

Most DAWs have the choise of using different converters so strictly they are not part of the sound of a DAW.

What's left is built-in plugs that, i agree, do sound very different (for better of worse) in all daws.

Also i would agree that the user interface design can change things a bit, but saying it actually sounds better is an anthropomorphism.
You sound better.
This is your brain.
This is your brain on samp,..

The more you talk about absolutes, the more you risk looking like a dictator.

Who told you i was one?
AND WHERE ARE MY GODDAMN NEW CLOTHES!!??!!??

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by monomer

Buffer size seems an odd one out. Depends realy on what you're doing and how.

Not really, I hear definite differences between buffer size choices, ASIO and other wise. It has been stated by various developers that many plugins work and sound better with higher buffer sizes and higher sample rates.

But we are straying.
My remarks were about DAWs in particular, that is, already digitized by the AD stage and before being output to the DA stage.

Right, but your comparison of a Studer to digital audio storage included things other than just the storage medium. You included electronics, heads and I think you even talked about room temperature as being a consideration.

Mark

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by winrar

ehhee,

we listened to such comments owners mixes, and they all sounds like F***

no one with decent production skills so far, claimed such thing...

you wanna be people, keep dreaming about your samp, in your dream world.

Slow down, take a deep breath and try to stick to English sentences please.

Where did you say that audio from last nights session was?

Mark

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by laser

Mark, they don't get it--they never will get it.

It's really quite simple:
1) The definitive test was (and still is) the one done by Lynn Fuston, which shows summing 22 channels of a single signal nulls or closely nulls where you can't hear a difference. It's a fact. I don't know why people have a problem with this.

2) Lynn's test is very limited. It does not accurately simulate the countless variables involved in a real mixing environment. Lynn readily acknowledges this as does most experienced mixers. It the compu-geek novices that pull out the null test and comes to the conclusion that all aspects of the DAW nulls. Many of their comments clearly show they are more experienced with computers than audio. One thinks Bob O. made his comments for monetary gain--a really stupid remark for anyone who has followed Bob's career or read his posts. Another confused dither with SRC.

3) I wrote #1 and #2 (with quotes from Lynn and Bob) about 200 posts ago. They don't get it--they never will get it.

4) It's really a waste of time trying to have an objective and rational discussion on this subject.

With #4 in mind, I'm out of here.

Laser

I can't find fault with anything you say, especially point #4.

Mark

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

Slow down, take a deep breath and try to stick to English sentences please.

Where did you say that audio from last nights session was?

Mark

you know i am a foreign exchange student.... so its very natural for me to make
such mistakes,

recording session was at school. and we have a supervisor at most times, incase we f*** up the equipment... we get mostly local bands for our sessions, free time for them, in return, we get experience, but mostly, very very bad bands...
vocals are 80% out bf tune kind of bands.... we usually mute the vocal tracks, on our final assignments,

last night it was electronic/live mixture chill out kind of bad, live drums, turntable, keyboard, bass, and some DIY weird FXl...

what has anything to do with the subject anyway ?

[Gibson]

To Mplanke
What makes you make such a statement and say that im still learning my craft.
I have been recording for over 25 year. I currently have tracks played on CMT.
I have recorded countless albums and won album of the year. I'm trying to be low key here on this forum. I don't want to blow my horn.
I'm a full timer. Are you?

w

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by Gibson

To Mplanke
What makes you make such a statement and say that im still learning my craft.
I have been recording for over 25 year. I currently have tracks played on CMT.
I have recorded countless albums and won album of the year. I'm trying to be low key here on this forum. I don't want to blow my horn.
I'm a full timer. Are you?

w

It's all good, I certainly respect the fact that you do this full time as do I. It's not the easiest path to choose.

I think your attributing that comment to something that was not directed at you. I can only assume since there's no quoted context that you're referring to this post?

Samplitude sound quality

I'm thinking it's you.

For someone who is starting to learn the craft, you come off as a know-it-all more often than not.

Mark

This is directed at WinRAR, who is in fact a student by his own admission.

I'm sorry if you felt that this was directed it at you, that wasn't my intention.

Mark

[drpenguen]

Originally Posted by Gibson

To Mplanke
I'm trying to be low key here on this forum. I don't want to blow my horn.
I'm a full timer. Are you?

w

sounds all good.... anyway, i have a question re your DAW recording 1. did you use same AD 2. did you use same ASIO card 3. most important is, did you record in to different DAWs AT THE SAME TIME? perhaps you read my post fom yesterday, that, i have played some guitar in to lynx aurora 8, and recorded at the same time to samp and cubase. result was perfect infinitive NULL. but, when i do over dubs, they all sound slighly different re slight different pick usage, performance, feeling and amount of drink i have so, if you did record the band in to the different DAWs at the same time, with the same audio card... would you please re-check your configurations, due human error. not every sound card is capable of interfacing with different DAWs at the same time. if i am able to get null, you should have had null too, unless human error, or different takes, one at a time to different DAWs as you you should be aware of every single take can sound totally different.... alter all, humans playing the instruments,

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by winrar

you know i am a foreign exchange student.... so its very natural for me to make
such mistakes,

All the more reason to take your time and get it right instead of making excuses.

recording session was at school. and we have a supervisor at most times, incase we f*** up the equipment... we get mostly local bands for our sessions, free time for them, in return, we get experience, but mostly, very very bad bands...
vocals are 80% out bf tune kind of bands.... we usually mute the vocal tracks, on our final assignments,

last night it was electronic/live mixture chill out kind of bad, live drums, turntable, keyboard, bass, and some DIY weird FXl...

what has anything to do with the subject anyway ?

Well for one it gives everyone a context in which to judge your absolute statements.

Secondly, since you spend most of your time name calling and criticizing my work it gives an important benchmark and frame of reference.

I'll have to look into this muting the vocals on all my "final assignments" thing, sounds like you're on to something there.

Mark

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by drpenguen

sounds all good.... anyway, i have a question re your DAW recording 1. did you use same AD 2. did you use same ASIO card 3. most important is, did you record in to different DAWs AT THE SAME TIME? perhaps you read my post fom yesterday, that, i have played some guitar in to lynx aurora 8, and recorded at the same time to samp and cubase. result was perfect infinitive NULL.

I think the relatively easy task of recording audio into a DAW has very little to do with the almost infinite possibilities available when playing back and mixing audio on a given platform.

Mark

[Gibson]

It's all cool. I'm not offended. I'm off to bed it's 5am here in Melbourne.

[siriusbliss]

WOW - I've been so busy here in the studio doing remixes of tunes originally recorded in other hosts that I didn't realize that this thread is already up to 14 pages .!!!
(...and I ain't lyin' - making a living on the side remixing 10 tunes done in other programs is hard work .)

Greg

p.s. I'm with Gibson on his approach - as I'm working more going THROUGH the DAW via hardware. I'm doing more processing inside Scope hardware via Samplitude with very good results.

p.p.s. Another reason I love Samplitude is the professionalism of their forum - vs. all this nonconstructive immature wrangling and name-calling b.s.

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

All the more reason to take your time and get it right instead of making excuses.

this is a very pointless comment Mark. i dont have to learn your language perfectly.
could be much better, so are your mixes.

Originally Posted by mplancke

Secondly, since you spend most of your time name calling and criticizing my work it gives an important benchmark and frame of reference.

you asked for it, by your attitude

besides, you have never answerd my wuestion re: your insulation over teachers..

where is the difference between you and me.

Originally Posted by mplancke

I'll have to look into this muting the vocals on all my "final assignments" thing, sounds like you're on to something there.
Mark

we need show our skills at our assignments. unfortunately tuning vocals is not in our
learning schedule. and when we do assignments, we do them as team work.
every body mutes bad vocal lines...
we have specific, vocal recording techniques lectures too, but then, school brings
qualified vocal performers to the collage. and we record them.

by final assignments, i meant the end result of that specific assignments.
every assignments is different.
we have to show that we are capable of using different techniques available/known to us...

so, i am not really up to something, then being a basic, student.

learning is good. denial of truth is no good.

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by winrar

we need show our skills at our assignments. unfortunately tuning vocals is not in our
learning schedule. and when we do assignments, we do them as team work.
every body mutes bad vocal lines...
we have specific, vocal recording techniques lectures too, but then, school brings
qualified vocal performers to the collage. and we record them.

Ahhh, I think I'm seeing the picture clearly now.

So you never get to do a whole project from start to finish then, because that's covered in the "after you graduate" course.

Any producer mutes bad vocal lines but we also work hard to replace them with something good. Usually, but not always that involves coaching the singer, who may or may not be a "Qualified Vocal Performer", pushing them to deliver a better performance. I don't suppose they teach you how to do that in the "which microphone is better for triangle and ethnic percussion" course.

And, where did you say we could hear one of your productions?

Mark

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

Ahhh, I think I'm seeing the picture clearly now.

So you never get to do a whole project from start to finish then, because that's covered in the "after you graduate" course.

Any producer mutes bad vocal lines but we also work hard to replace them with something good. Usually, but not always that involves coaching the singer, who may or may not be a "Qualified Vocal Performer", pushing them to deliver a better performance.

I don't suppose they teach you how to do that in the "which microphone is better for triangle and ethnic percussion" courses.

And, where did you say we could hear one of your productions?

Mark

typical of you ehhee

as always you are taking the part from my post that you think you can have a go at me,
and ignore the rest...
you think you are very cleaver by doing this, but a lot of people reading these posts.

unfortunately Mark, they teach us pretty deeper than your triangle example.
we learn how to record if there is no specific mic or equipment is available, and what to do, too... so,we are not only learning how to use SSL, euphonix, NEVE or protools, etc....

so, we are not equipment dependent like you are..

and we get sessions with famous producers, engineers too. so we learn more tricks, from the first hand. our trial and error time is for our experience.... for creative ussage of equipment... unlike you again...

i probably have more knowledge than you by now.
ie: i can use compressor far much better than you, in any situation.... in any mixing tracking...
i am getting this idea, by listening your REFERENCE recordings from your web.
which, you tried to blame your mastering engineer for your poor unbalanced mixes

it wasnt only me who made comment on your work either.... others shared my view too, also, all the teachers at school shares my view.

just because, people at GS are mostly polite, and they are not making any bad comments on your work, it doesnt mean, you are any good.

re my work, i dont have anything to play you, as the recordings dont belong to me.
next term we will be able to record our own stuff, then i will send you some for sure.
since they already sounds so much better than your work, i wonder, what will you do when you hear my stuff in your real life experience studio

since, it will sound better ion your samp too
thats one more advantage for me ehe


you are keep ignoring your insulation over teachers btw....

[winrar]

wowow boy

thats a very ugly looking new logo you have here MARK....

i would even click on it....

its a friendly advice from me to you

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by winrar

thats a very ugly looking new logo you have here MARK....

i would even click on it....

Good, things are looking up.

Mark

[mplancke]

Originally Posted by winrar

so, we are not equipment dependent like you are..

and we get sessions with famous producers, engineers too. so we learn more tricks, from the first hand. our trial and error time is for our experience.... for creative ussage of equipment... unlike you again...

i probably have more knowledge than you by now.
ie: i can use compressor far much better than you, in any situation.... in any mixing tracking...
i am getting this idea, by listening your REFERENCE recordings from your web.

Just to be clear, I could care a less what you think of my work because I don't respect your opinion.

That's not hard to understand is it?

Since when is an MP3 a REFERENCE recording? Is that what they teach you there?

And where can we hear a production of yours that shows your amazing grasp of all things audio?

Mark

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

Just to be clear, I could care a less what you think of my work because I don't respect your opinion.

That's not hard to understand is it?

Since when is an MP3 a REFERENCE recording? Is that what they teach you there?

And where can we hear a production of yours that shows your amazing grasp of all things audio?

Mark

ehe

you are sooo funny Mark....

i thibk you should be a comedian, you would make more money....

surely you care about anybodies comment re your work,
specially if its a good one
also, i am not that ruthless, i converted my work to low quality mp3 too.


for your information Mark,

when ypou convert your audio file to mp3,
misusage of compressor doesnt jump out of the mix, just because its lover quality.
if its a bad mix your mp3 would be bad too.

i listen 128mp3s everyday, so i know what mp3 sounds like

you are still ignoring your insulation over the teachers Mark....

are you shamed of something

[RTR]

Originally Posted by mplancke

Ahhh, I think I'm seeing the picture clearly now.

So you never get to do a whole project from start to finish then, because that's covered in the "after you graduate" course.

Any producer mutes bad vocal lines but we also work hard to replace them with something good. Usually, but not always that involves coaching the singer, who may or may not be a "Qualified Vocal Performer", pushing them to deliver a better performance. I don't suppose they teach you how to do that in the "which microphone is better for triangle and ethnic percussion" course.

And, where did you say we could hear one of your productions?

Mark

Checked out your site..MAN I sure like "the big list of cool stuff in the studio" Nice!!

[winrar]

Originally Posted by mplancke

And where can we hear a production of yours that shows your amazing grasp of all things audio?

Mark

read post #417

i think you missed it....


additional to that,

to make criticism over someone's work, you dont have to have something better...

in your case of ikeep asking for my work is trying to have a piss race....
and its very childish of you
i could do that, but you are an adult,.. or did i misssssssss something...

i wouldnt even involve with such stupid pointless rece with you, as
i can clearly hear, your mixes contains full of misusage of equipment,l plug and DAW.

i have to go to school soon... you are wasting my time....

[winrar]

Originally Posted by RTR

Checked out your site..MAN I sure like "the big list of cool stuff in the studio" Nice!!

yea, true, the big list of cool stuff

shame about the mixes