The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Ableton - sound quality DAW Software
Old 18th November 2018
  #571
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by beatflux View Post
The gain staging and summing aren't the problem, its the effects.
no one who owns Ableton Live is required to use the included effects. Therefore you cannot say the "DAW" sounds like "X". The DAW's included effects cannot be counted as part of the "sound" because unlike the summing and the faders, you can avoid them. Most people do.

Most people, once they buy a DAW, start the process of loading up on their favorite third-party plugins. In fact, that collection is your expression of your personal recording and mixing style - not your DAW's included collection and certainly not your DAW's so-called 'sound engine' .

In any case, while you have no choice but to use the summing and the faders, nobody is putting a gun to your head to use effects that you think sound bad. Fortunately, the summing and faders all sound fine in every DAW.

Every Ableton user eventually ends up with a different set of effects that they use regularly. Therefore every Ableton user ends up with a different "sound" due to effects. Therefore Ableton the DAW cannot be said to "have a sound" as a DAW. Nobody can listen to a recording and say what DAW that recording came from.
2
Share
Old 23rd November 2018
  #572
Gear Maniac
 

i think the attack on ableton lives summing might have been started by a certain company that may or may not be a little worried about how well ableton are doing with sales and how the world is changing in abletons favour.

im not a live user, but im happy for ableton, and what they have created is a beast of a DAW that successfully sums 1+1 to get 2.
1
Share
Old 23rd November 2018
  #573
Lives for gear
 
login's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by parricide View Post
i think the attack on ableton lives summing might have been started by a certain company that may or may not be a little worried about how well ableton are doing with sales and how the world is changing in abletons favour.

im not a live user, but im happy for ableton, and what they have created is a beast of a DAW that successfully sums 1+1 to get 2.
While I won't go into that assumption it doesn't help that companies market their DAWs with bold claims about their audio engine making customers believe they sound better than previous versions or other DAW's.
1
Share
Old 23rd November 2018
  #574
Lives for gear
 
DrAudioBot's Avatar
I love Live's Chorus and Flanger wtf!
Old 23rd November 2018
  #575
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
no one who owns Ableton Live is required to use the included effects. Therefore you cannot say the "DAW" sounds like "X". The DAW's included effects cannot be counted as part of the "sound" because unlike the summing and the faders, you can avoid them. Most people do.

Most people, once they buy a DAW, start the process of loading up on their favorite third-party plugins. In fact, that collection is your expression of your personal recording and mixing style - not your DAW's included collection and certainly not your DAW's so-called 'sound engine' .

In any case, while you have no choice but to use the summing and the faders, nobody is putting a gun to your head to use effects that you think sound bad. Fortunately, the summing and faders all sound fine in every DAW.

Every Ableton user eventually ends up with a different set of effects that they use regularly. Therefore every Ableton user ends up with a different "sound" due to effects. Therefore Ableton the DAW cannot be said to "have a sound" as a DAW. Nobody can listen to a recording and say what DAW that recording came from.
Point. Entirely. Missed.
Old 24th November 2018
  #576
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
While I won't go into that assumption it doesn't help that companies market their DAWs with bold claims about their audio engine making customers believe they sound better than previous versions or other DAW's.
The advertising slogan I see most often from DAWs is:

"nothing sounds better"

which is absolutely true.

As for there being a conspiracy against Abelton, I have been on this site for a long time and I have read dozens of "this DAW sounds best" threads. And "this DAW sounds worst" threads. From my reading, literally every DAW has taken its turn in the dunk tank. Every DAW has been singled out as sounding good, bad, thin, fat, best, worst; "mellow", "woody", "warm", "harsh", "mid-forward". You name it, some difference-hearer has heard that difference. These opinions are self-contradictory to the point where the lack of agreement becomes strong evidence against the entire premise.

If such differences were 'real' but simply as-yet-unmeasured, there would be a consistency where people would largely agree. People largely agree that a Telecaster is "twangier" than a Les Paul, even when "twang" is not a very scientific concept. People largely agree that the AEA R84 ribbon is a "warmer" mic than a Rode NTK condenser .

Among the people who claim to hear a difference between DAWs, however, there is zero agreement. It's a joke how these people who hear differences cannot even agree among themselves what that difference consists of. It shows what a crock the whole idea is.
1
Share
Old 24th November 2018
  #577
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
The advertising slogan I see most often from DAWs is:

"nothing sounds better"


technically i cant argue with that statement

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post

As for there being a conspiracy against Abelton, I have been on this site for a long time and I have read dozens of "this DAW sounds best" threads. And "this DAW sounds worst" threads. From my reading, literally every DAW has taken its turn in the dunk tank. Every DAW has been singled out as sounding good, bad, thin, fat, best, worst; "mellow", "woody", "warm", "harsh", "mid-forward". You name it, some difference-hearer has heard that difference. These opinions are self-contradictory to the point where the lack of agreement becomes strong evidence against the entire premise.

If such differences were 'real' but simply as-yet-unmeasured, there would be a consistency where people would largely agree. People largely agree that a Telecaster is "twangier" than a Les Paul, even when "twang" is not a very scientific concept. People largely agree that the AEA R84 ribbon is a "warmer" mic than a Rode NTK condenser .

Among the people who claim to hear a difference between DAWs, however, there is zero agreement. It's a joke how these people who hear differences cannot even agree among themselves what that difference consists of. It shows what a crock the whole idea is.
good point.
but if people wont believe a null test there is no way they will believe that.
2
Share
Old 24th November 2018
  #578
The truth of the matter is that the DAW sounds only as good as the monitors that are being used.
2
Share
Old 25th November 2018
  #579
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synth Guru View Post
The truth of the matter is that the DAW sounds only as good as the monitors that are being used.
i would argue that the better the monitors the worse the DAW will sound
Old 25th November 2018
  #580
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by parricide View Post
i would argue that the better the monitors the worse the DAW will sound
I would argue that if you used the same monitors to listen to both DAWs they would sound the same - as long as you performed the exact same operations in both DAWs
4
Share
Old 27th November 2018
  #581
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
I would argue that if you used the same monitors to listen to both DAWs they would sound the same - as long as you performed the exact same operations in both DAWs
agreed, but that is out of context
Old 30th November 2018
  #582
Lives for gear
 
Dysanfel's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synth Guru View Post
The truth of the matter is that the DAW sounds only as good as the monitors that are being used.
Given this line of thinking a DAW is only as good as the users ears, since if you do not what to listen for the quality of monitors will make no difference. All DAWs audio engines are basically the same in 2018, it is the skill of the user that makes the difference. Pick the DAW that best suits your workflow. They can all obtain excellent results if the user is skilled.
2
Share
Old 8th January 2019
  #583
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

Any Ableton users know of this “issue” ?

Data Loss On Low Level Signals

It appears that at times when it should be adding 1+1, it’s not adding anything at all...
2
Share
Old 26th January 2019
  #584
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkyfingers View Post
Any Ableton users know of this “issue” ?

Data Loss On Low Level Signals

It appears that at times when it should be adding 1+1, it’s not adding anything at all...
Acknowledged as a bug apparently and a temp fix exists. Why didn't you post this yourself?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishmac View Post
Guys, i got pretty interesting news!

I had contacted the Ableton support about the issue and today they finally responded.
First of all, they say it's a bug and they work on fixing this, which is very good news i guess.
But they also mentioned a workaround that you could try rightnow by adding the following line to the options.txt file:

-_AudioOffTimeInSamples=691200000

If you don't now about options.txt, you can google the folder where you have to put it.

Give it a shot, I will as soon as i'm home.
Direct link >

Here's one response:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrgs View Post
Holy **** dude, that worked! Will not need to switch DAWs Thanks so much man

Last edited by Mikael B; 27th January 2019 at 08:55 AM..
Old 26th January 2019
  #585
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lourson View Post
on the playback end:
same project (let's say Slate CLA's sessions, or something with a reasonable load of plugin and math going on), same set of converters / same computer for playback of both daw's / same drivers.

on the recording end:
second computer with its own daw and its own set of converters.

you may not even need to null test to hear what's going in low level information like reverb trails and echoes, high mid and top end precision when a lot of math is happening in realtime
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
I don't understand why you are bringing converters into the discussion at all.
Exactly. The only valid reason to record the audio stream like how @Lourseon suggests is is to expose inferior sound quality at the DAC stage itself only after the digital recording of the stream just before the DAC has been demonstrated to null and you want to exhaust all possible explanations for what you think you "hear". Remember though that a DAW doesn't handle the DAC stage.

It's reasonable to assume that a computer system that can't keep up will have some dropouts and other artefacts in playback. That a specific DAW may be better to withstand the same amount of tracks (a load) than another with the same project contents would also be a reasonable assumption.

You could probably demonstrate this on a particular system and verify results with ABX testing. It would be better to separate roles, so the person doing the recordings isn't evaluating nor being present in the test.

But as another more powerful system would likely display different results removing such a potential difference, the results can't be said to be about DAW specific audio quality problems. It would rather be an issue about resource use, that while important and related, is another kind of problem.

Last edited by Mikael B; 26th January 2019 at 06:10 AM..
Old 5th February 2019
  #586
Gear Head
 
rezident's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calagan View Post
It's crazy !

So much bad music all around, and so much superhuman engineers with surnatural hearing, knowing without effort when a mix comes from Logic or Live.

A mix is the result of so much parameters : Composer > performer > sound engineer > room acoustic (during recording) > microphone > preamp > A/D conversion > DAW > plugins > DA conversion > monitors > room acoustic (during mixing) > mastering > etc. etc. etc. etc.

I'm amazed at discovering so much talents, able to get through all these parameters and isolate the "sound" of each daw...

I think it's much easier to guess which program was used for mixing by watching the sound engineer (clothes, attitude, etc.) and the kind of music he's mixing...

By the way, automatic warping of audio in Live doesn't change nothing in the sound if the tempo of the audio file is the same as the session (i.e, if you don't change the tempo of your audio file and start to actually warp it).
It nulls. Just do it and verify by yourself...
What's the difference between the clothes and attitude of a pro tools engineer vs. a logic engineer?
Old 6th February 2019
  #587
Gear Nut
 
Calagan's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rezident View Post
What's the difference between the clothes and attitude of a pro tools engineer vs. a logic engineer?
What I wanted to say, with this absurd exemple, is that it's as meaningless to find origins of the sound of a mix in the daw as to find it in the clothes...

A guy with tatoos and a beard can mix classical music. A guy with a tie can mix aggressive hardcore. And they can mix both music with Protools, Logic or Cubase without any difference other than ergonomical...
But regarding clothes and attitude, you can find some sociological reasons to think the guy with tatooes will be more prone to mixing in a rock'n roll way, the guy with tie to mixing in a clean way (no determination : just sociological clues).
And maybe the guys mixing with protool are statistically more professionnal than the guys mixing with Logic (just because of the price of both daw for exemple, or the fact that Pro Tools is often a professionnal requirement), which could in turn have an influence on the clothing and attitude.
But, another time, it was just a stupid exemple, just to show how crazy it is to search for differences in the sound of a mix in the daw, when you can find theses differences in so much aspects with much more importance (the clothes being an absolutely meaningless one)...
3
Share
Old 4 weeks ago
  #588
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by andfra View Post
same track and no fx. Still not the same sound.
The daw colors the sound, either mixcraft och ableton.

Warp mode is off so it must be something else.
I've noticed this too while importing tracks from Ableton to Logic. In Ableton they sound mid-high oriented and in Logic the peak drops like -1.5db and the sound is more low-midd oriented. Which is like a big bummer for me since I am producing in Ableton and recording/mixing in Logic, my beats sound like very nice in Ableton but after I export them they don't really sound the way they sounded in the project.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #589
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fanelos View Post
I've noticed this too while importing tracks from Ableton to Logic. In Ableton they sound mid-high oriented and in Logic the peak drops like -1.5db and the sound is more low-midd oriented. Which is like a big bummer for me since I am producing in Ableton and recording/mixing in Logic, my beats sound like very nice in Ableton but after I export them they don't really sound the way they sounded in the project.
make sure your pan law settings match

Logic Pro X: General Audio Settings
Old 3 weeks ago
  #590
Lives for gear
 
lestermagneto's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
make sure your pan law settings match

Logic Pro X: General Audio Settings
sorry to ask, but what pan law should one set Logic to to match say Ableton 9 (I know they changed some things with Ableton 10...)....

and would stereo bounces just imported to logic be effected in any way even if no panning is employed yet? i would think that would be same... but could be missing something..
Old 3 weeks ago
  #591
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lestermagneto View Post
sorry to ask, but what pan law should one set Logic to to match say Ableton 9 (I know they changed some things with Ableton 10...)....
I have no idea what Ableton 9 defaults to where in the menus you have to go to find it. But if these are your DAWs, it is worth taking the effort to locate these features.

Quote:
and would stereo bounces just imported to logic be effected in any way even if no panning is employed yet? i would think that would be same... but could be missing something..
Stereo tracks fully panned should be the same, but Logic also has a "compensated" pan law. The normal one would be 0dB on the sides and -3db in the center, but with the compensated law, the sides would be at +3dB and the center would be zero.

This could really give you an impression of something different if you are used to seeing your faders at a certain point. But for me, when I start my actual Mix, I am zeroing everything anyway. Even when I don't move to another program to mix, I like to start fresh. Since every DAW gives you a fader as well as a pan pot, Pan Law is not "destiny". You can still put any track anywhere you want at any volume you want. It does not "force" your mix to come out a certain way, but it surely can give you the impression that something has "changed" in the import.

Enough people have done enough null tests, that I believe we can dismiss this possibility out of hand.
2
Share
Old 3 weeks ago
  #592
Lives for gear
 
lestermagneto's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
.

This could really give you an impression of something different if you are used to seeing your faders at a certain point. But for me, when I start my actual Mix, I am zeroing everything anyway. Even when I don't move to another program to mix, I like to start fresh. Since every DAW gives you a fader as well as a pan pot, Pan Law is not "destiny". You can still put any track anywhere you want at any volume you want. It does not "force" your mix to come out a certain way, but it surely can give you the impression that something has "changed" in the import.

Enough people have done enough null tests, that I believe we can dismiss this possibility out of hand.
oh yeah, i completely agree and work the same way, and I know Ableton offers now a variation of pan laws in v10, whereas before they did not. I was just not sure what Logic defaulted to, and this is probably the wrong place to ask lol, and will google the "default" behavior, as most people I work with using it right now are probably NOT changing from the default...
Old 3 weeks ago
  #593
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by fanelos View Post
I've noticed this too while importing tracks from Ableton to Logic. In Ableton they sound mid-high oriented and in Logic the peak drops like -1.5db and the sound is more low-midd oriented. Which is like a big bummer for me since I am producing in Ableton and recording/mixing in Logic, my beats sound like very nice in Ableton but after I export them they don't really sound the way they sounded in the project.
This only indicates you have learning to do. I've noticed level variations when I exported audio to Reaper. This simply means I analyze what's different and adjust accordingly, if I feel this is needed. This solves the problem whereas the attitude you put forward here (your assumptions) does not. Only you can make the decisions of how you want to work, but I've made mine and I'm at peace.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #594
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
This only indicates you have learning to do. I've noticed level variations when I exported audio to Reaper. This simply means I analyze what's different and adjust accordingly, if I feel this is needed. This solves the problem whereas the attitude you put forward here (your assumptions) does not. Only you can make the decisions of how you want to work, but I've made mine and I'm at peace.
I understand your point, but I don't find necessary learning how a DAW modifies my audio track and process it further keeping those changes is mind. It's not normal, it's like scratching your head with your feet. The solution is to stop these modifiers from happening in order to have the same audio peaks and eq levels on every DAW or whatever playback/edit software you are using.

It's like the guys from Apple would blame me that I'm producing music in other DAW. Well, excuse me then.))

Cheers!
Old 3 weeks ago
  #595
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
make sure your pan law settings match

Logic Pro X: General Audio Settings

Thanks dude.

I have latest Logic Pro X.4, but I can't see that Pan Law option.

Cheers!
Old 3 weeks ago
  #596
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by fanelos View Post
I understand your point, but I don't find necessary learning how a DAW modifies my audio track and process it further keeping those changes is mind. It's not normal…
It's indeed normal. You wanting it not to be doesn't change anything. It only gives you something more to potentially suffer from and be irritated about. This is not necessary.

We all have those focal points or pet peeves where we feel in such a way, but in this case the differences are very small and typically easily overcome —like pan law for instance — that it makes little sense to be irritated about this. If you switch any other tool, like EQ, it will seldom sound exactly the same even with the same parameter values. If you're switching out the studio itself, which is what a DAW is or is the center of, differences are to be expected.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #597
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nenova View Post
Ableton sounds good
Yes. Now can we please just let this thread die?
Old 3 weeks ago
  #598
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by EMMST View Post
Yes. Now can we please just let this thread die?
There's indeed an idea: Kill this thread by posting new messages to it. It might work. Just look at the Dithering threads. They're all but dead now.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #599
Gear Head
 
rezident's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nenova View Post
Ableton sounds good
I feel like Ableton 10 sounds better than Ableton 9 because there are more features. Plus the GUI looks different, which impacts how you may perceive/work on the sound, thereby changing your end results (for the better).

So to say Ableton sounds good, you really need to specify which one you think sounds good, or do they all sound good? And if so, is it all the same amount of 'goodness', or is one somewhat better than the other (eg. Live 9 vs 10.) or is one much better than the other. What reasons lead to this, etc.?

There are so many questions and potential that this thread has, so I really hope that it doesn't die!

Old 2 weeks ago
  #600
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
I would completely disagree, I found the replies rather amusing. But then, I'm not a native english speaker, so maybe that's it.
Hey, Sascha is back. That is nice.
1
Share
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump