The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Logic Pro X 10.5 is OUT!
Old 6 days ago
  #391
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Sorry, but that's utter bogus and it has been proven as that mutliple times.
Yes, there's possible differences of things once you start adding plugins and moving things around (automation, the way faders are calibrated, panning laws, maybe the way plugins are dealt with, whatever...), but as long as you don't do that, it's bogus and I'd bet Mr. Zimmer wouldn't do well in an ABX blindtest.
When you record the same source through the same hardware, using the same audio settings, it will sound identical in each and every host. There's neither "mojo" nor "broken audio engines" these days.
Yes, that sounds like complete rubbish, I don't care who said it, or how many Hollywood blockbusters they have scored.
Old 6 days ago
  #392
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Sorry, but that's utter bogus and it has been proven as that mutliple times.
Yes, there's possible differences of things once you start adding plugins and moving things around (automation, the way faders are calibrated, panning laws, maybe the way plugins are dealt with, whatever...), but as long as you don't do that, it's bogus and I'd bet Mr. Zimmer wouldn't do well in an ABX blindtest.
When you record the same source through the same hardware, using the same audio settings, it will sound identical in each and every host. There's neither "mojo" nor "broken audio engines" these days.
The only limited case where this would be true is if the sample rate of the source matches the sample rate of the project.

So yes, they all sound the same if playing a 48 kHz audio file in a 48 kHz project.

But it seems that each of them use different algos for upsampling conversions, and these immediately color and alter the sound slightly, which only becomes amplified with further edits.

And then there are other issues, like what I've found in my other thread, where any logic software instrument seems to go through a sound engine that is apparently aliasing in projects with sample rates below 192 kHz, and I've found flex edits appear to do the same.

I'm very interested in seeing comparative upsampling analysis between DAWs, but it is obvious that they don't "sound the same" except for in the very limited situation of the playback of an audio file of a specific sample rate within a project of the same sample rate.
Old 6 days ago
  #393
Gear Head
 

‘D anyone have any problems with GUI specifically with Drum Machine Designer? Dragging the window around seems really sluggish, clicking on each cell isn’t expected behaviour as well. For example I had NI battery open as well and it doesn’t display this behaviour’

Was working with Drum Designer today it was smooth and normal...
Old 6 days ago
  #394
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Quinn View Post
The only limited case where this would be true is if the sample rate of the source matches the sample rate of the project.

So yes, they all sound the same if playing a 48 kHz audio file in a 48 kHz project.

But it seems that each of them use different algos for upsampling conversions, and these immediately color and alter the sound slightly, which only becomes amplified with further edits.
That's quite obvious, isn't it? However, I found Logic SR conversion to be quite decent. I remember doing a comparison long time ago and it turned out to be ok.
Nothing you do all the time anyway. Usually you record and stick with that samplerate.

Quote:
And then there are other issues, like what I've found in my other thread, where any logic software instrument seems to go through a sound engine that is apparently aliasing in projects with sample rates below 192 kHz, and I've found flex edits appear to do the same.
Any Logic instrument? I think this is only true for the sample based ones.
Anyway, that's got nothing to do with Logics sound quality per se - or lack thereof, as per Mr. Zimmers questionable statement.
Old 6 days ago
  #395
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
That's quite obvious, isn't it? However, I found Logic SR conversion to be quite decent. I remember doing a comparison long time ago and it turned out to be ok.
If it was obvious, then why would anyone argue that every DAW sounds the same without specifically stating the clear limitation of scope they are referencing (playback of same sample rate audio file in same sample rate project)?

It is far more obvious that any alteration made in the DAW has combinations of different algos and results that prove they will on the whole not sound the same in general use.

The SR conversion in Logic is interesting, to me its a very different sound compared to the original, again which only becomes amplified with each edit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Nothing you do all the time anyway. Usually you record and stick with that samplerate.
Any loop or sample coming into the project will be effected if it isn't the exact same sample rate as the project.

Given Live Loops and the Samplers, this is something most people will be doing all of the time in Logic.

I think people might be ok if they only record live and don't edit it, but any flex edits will still have aliasing distorion in projects under 192 kHz.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Any Logic instrument? I think this is only true for the sample based ones.
I'm seeing it in Drum Synth, flex edits, the samplers, etc... I'm not sure how deep it goes exactly, but its likely even deeper.
Old 6 days ago
  #396
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Quinn View Post
The SR conversion in Logic is interesting, to me its a very different sound compared to the original, again which only becomes amplified with each edit.
Did you ever do multiple SR conversions followed by a nulltest?
I did. I actually even did that just now, to re-confirm.
Started with 48kHz, converted to 44.1, reimported the file (which automatically converts it to 48). Converted the reimported file and reimported that one as well. Inverted it and compared to the original. Silence. And that's with one full stop 48->44.1->48 cycle which wasn't necessary already.
No idea what you'd improve there.
Old 6 days ago
  #397
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Did you ever do multiple SR conversions followed by a nulltest?
I did. I actually even did that just now, to re-confirm.
Started with 48kHz, converted to 44.1, reimported the file (which automatically converts it to 48). Converted the reimported file and reimported that one as well. Inverted it and compared to the original. Silence. And that's with one full stop 48->44.1->48 cycle which wasn't necessary already.
No idea what you'd improve there.
You downsampled with the same algo you used to upsample, correct? That would obviously give that result.

You would have to compare the waveform of the for example 96k upsample to the 48k original sample, or resample the audio of the 96k sample (without a SR conversion algo in the middle) at 48k and null test that against the original 48k sample.

But yeah, using the same algo to get back and forth between two sample rates is going to obviously have the same results, and is not what I'm talking about.
Old 6 days ago
  #398
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Quinn View Post
You downsampled with the same algo you used to upsample, correct? That would obviously give that result.

You would have to compare the waveform of the for example 96k upsample to the 48k original sample, or resample the audio of the 96k sample (without a SR conversion algo in the middle) at 48k and null test that against the original 48k sample.

But yeah, using the same algo to get back and forth between two sample rates is going to obviously have the same results, and is not what I'm talking about.
Sorry, but that isn't making any sense.
Old 6 days ago
  #399
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Sorry, but that isn't making any sense.
Let's start with this.

You seemed to know different DAWs use different SRC algos, which all have slightly different results, and that there isn't a universal equation for SRC which all DAWs use, correct?

So what you wrote is that:

A can convert to B and then back to A perfectly within the same DAW.

But what I am saying is that the destination B is slightly different for every DAW based on their preferred algorithm.

So we have a clear starting point for where small differences in sound between different DAWs can occur.

That same algo is likely used throughout the system for various operations, and causing alterations to the sound throughout, which will essentially make it have a different sonic character overall.
Old 6 days ago
  #400
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Quinn View Post
Let's start with this.

You seemed to know different DAWs use different SRC algos, which all have slightly different results, and that there isn't a universal equation for SRC which all DAWs use, correct?
No, not correct. It would have to be proven first.

Besides, according to your statements, there should be some sort of loss in the signal, added somewhere in the process (most likely while downsampling). My test would've shown this. But it didn't - at least not for this very 48->44.1->48 test. If there's no noticeable loss (fwiw, I'm not saying there never is, but in this case there wasn't), there's no need for further comparisons.
And no, it's got nothing to do with this test being performed within one DAW, either. If there was a loss at downsampling, no upsampling algorithm would ever bring that back.

But I'd happily do another conversion test, such as Logic vs. WaveLab.
Old 6 days ago
  #401
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
No, not correct. It would have to be proven first.

Besides, according to your statements, there should be some sort of loss in the signal, added somewhere in the process (most likely while downsampling). My test would've shown this. But it didn't - at least not for this very 48->44.1->48 test. If there's no noticeable loss (fwiw, I'm not saying there never is, but in this case there wasn't), there's no need for further comparisons.
And no, it's got nothing to do with this test being performed within one DAW, either. If there was a loss at downsampling, no upsampling algorithm would ever bring that back.

But I'd happily do another conversion test, such as Logic vs. WaveLab.
Yeah, you are not understanding this.

There should not be any loss using the same algo to convert from one rate to another and back. It's literally a mathematical equation.

This isn't about loss, its that the algo itself alters the original into something else, and that algo is different between DAWs.

So, for example convert a 48 kHz sample to 96k in Logic.

Then convert a 48k sample to 96k in another program using a different algo.

Then compare those two 96k samples against each other.

So, I'm not talking about conversion loss at all, just differences between algos which create different sound.
Old 6 days ago
  #402
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Quinn View Post
This isn't about loss, its that the algo itself alters the original into something else, and that algo is different between DAWs.
You are making absolutely no sense here and this sentence perfectly shows how you are contradicting yourself.
Loss = Signal isn't the same as before.
Altered signal = Signal isn't the same as before.

So, in case the algorithms are altering the original (which is what you're saying), that *is* loss.
Old 6 days ago
  #403
Lives for gear
 

And fwiw...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Quinn View Post
So, for example convert a 48 kHz sample to 96k in Logic.

Then convert a 48k sample to 96k in another program using a different algo.

Then compare those two 96k samples against each other.
I did that, using Logic and WaveLab.
Files null.
Old 6 days ago
  #404
Gear Guru
 
jwh1192's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Well, it's actually not so much Logic getting confused, it's actually intended to be like this for whatever historical reasons, so Logic is always treating split stereo files (same length, only difference being the ".L"/".R" at the end of the file name) as a stereo file.
In older versions you were able to change the behaviour somewhat by checking a preference, so imported split stereo files would end up on two different channels which however would be locked to each other (at least the regions themselves would be).
I have no idea when that changed (I could look up what it's like in LP9...), but with LPX I can't find that preference anymore (it's been somewhere in the audio setup dialog).
If memory serves me right, this behaviour is a leftover from Logic being tailored to work as a frontend for TDM hardware.
hi Sascha, i had one of the TDM systems running Logic as Front End !!! worked great ... i am not sure when this started either .. i have just been splitng the files in PT and then bringing them into Logic ..

i will try what was stated above, and Drag them back into session after removing .L / .R .. when i tried last (before 10.5) when i dragged the files back into LPX after renaming they were Still Stereo Files .. seemsmaybe that behavior has changed

cheers john
Old 6 days ago
  #405
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwh1192 View Post
i will try what was stated above, and Drag them back into session after removing .L / .R .. when i tried last (before 10.5) when i dragged the files back into LPX after renaming they were Still Stereo Files .. seemsmaybe that behavior has changed
Fwiw, I'm still on 10.4.8.
Old 6 days ago
  #406
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
You are making absolutely no sense here and this sentence perfectly shows how you are contradicting yourself.
Loss = Signal isn't the same as before.
Altered signal = Signal isn't the same as before.

So, in case the algorithms are altering the original (which is what you're saying), that *is* loss.
No, I would consider it "loss" if you couldn't convert back to the original using the same algo you used to convert with.

But different algos do not create exactly the same results, there are subjective decisions within each algo about what is desirable, otherwise there would only be one algo/equation across all DAWs, which there isn't. These subjective decisions do create differences from the original across algos.

There is no contradiction there, sorry.
Old 6 days ago
  #407
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
And fwiw...



I did that, using Logic and WaveLab.
Files null.
Something tells me you didn't test this properly
Old 6 days ago
  #408
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Quinn View Post
Something tells me you didn't test this properly
Something tells me you have not much of a clue. But large portions of your other posts gave that away already. Sorry.
Old 6 days ago
  #409
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Something tells me you have not much of a clue. But large portions of your other posts gave that away already. Sorry.
Your post history, on the other hand, is a real treat

Have a good day.
Old 6 days ago
  #410
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Quinn View Post
Your post history, on the other hand, is a real treat
I have no idea what my post history should have to do with this, please elaborate.
Otherwise, feel free to test yourself before accusing other people of doing things wrong.
Old 6 days ago
  #411
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

What do you guys think of the stock plugins? I'm talking about "audio fx" plugins like the Channel EQ and Compressors.

My go to EQ has been DMG equilibrium for a while now, before that it was fabfilter Pro Q2 but I felt like Equilibrium didn't mess with the phase as much on multi-mic instruments such as drums. I also use the more CPU intensive linear settings of Equilibrium on the master or in mastering, that sounds pretty great.

Just for fun I decided I'd give the stock logic EQ a shot since it seems pretty convenient and easy to use even though it's not as feature rich as DMG or Fabfilter.
I did a 30 min mix of a rock song, drums, bass and guitars, and on individual channels the result is pretty good!

Logic Channel EQ (applied on individual channels) seems to give me a mix that sounds bigger and wider than Equilibrium, Equilibrium's mix is tighter sounding, I think it might be because it's more transparent but I liked what the Channel EQ did to the musicality.
On the 2-Bus I preferred DMG as it seems more 3D and punchy if you will, like I can see deeper in the picture.

The compressors seem pretty cool as well, didn't test as much cause it's harder to match those but they sound pretty big! My recently favorite all around comp is again DMG trackcomp 2, I can tell this one is smoother in the top end if I compare the SSL type to logic's SSL type comp but the Logic version seems a bit wider with more top end, nice option.

So yeah, how do you like them?
Old 6 days ago
  #412
Lives for gear
 
syntonica's Avatar
The Logic EQ is nicely integrated and I never used anything but. It's where I learned to EQ like there's no tomorrow! And I always got outstanding results. So, no complaints here at all and no desire to ever try out a different EQ.

Compressors, on the other hand... We just don't get along.
Old 6 days ago
  #413
Lives for gear
 

Small tip regarding the Channel EQ: As you may know, clicking on the grey "EQ" area automatically inserts the Channel EQ on the first free insert slot. Hold down shift while doing so and it'll insert the Linear Phase EQ instead.
And fwiw, when you exchange the Channel EQ in favour of the Linear Phase EQ, the settings of the bands stay intact (vice versa as well).
Old 6 days ago
  #414
Qha
Gear Head
 

Love the stock eq and compressor, they’re so accessible and get the job done 80% the time. In critical things like vocals I use third party stuff.

I never use the blue default compressor though, it’s too slow for me. I’ve set studio fet (1176 emu) the default. It’s punchy as hell. Even usable in it’s 0 attack 0 release, which makes it distort very digitally. I don’t care how accurate it is, it’s very modern.
Old 5 days ago
  #415
Lives for gear
 
timtoonz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
You're right.

I had bounced the files to my desktop and when I dragged the L back into Logic, it was all of a sudden stereo.

Logic is obviously getting confused when importing the mono files back, and it's playing the original stereo file back.

A quick solution is to simply rename the bounced files.

I did that and both mono files import back into logic fine and play back as mono files.
This isn't what's happening on my system. I opened the "Audio_SPLIT.L.wav" file in a 3rd party audio editor (Izotope Rx7) and it still shows up as stereo, not mono.

Very odd indeed.
Old 5 days ago
  #416
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by timtoonz View Post
This isn't what's happening on my system. I opened the "Audio_SPLIT.L.wav" file in a 3rd party audio editor (Izotope Rx7) and it still shows up as stereo, not mono.

Very odd indeed.
Might be a matter of the audio editor (maybe there's some preference?). When I open the split files in WaveLab, they show up as mono.
Old 5 days ago
  #417
Lives for gear
 
timtoonz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Might be a matter of the audio editor (maybe there's some preference?). When I open the split files in WaveLab, they show up as mono.
Nope. Just checked - if I open a mono file in RX, it opens in mono just fine. If I open any of the "Audio_SPLIT.R or SPLIT.L" files that Logic exported after "Convert interleaved to split", then they're still stereo files.

Maybe Logic creates a "Split Stereo" format file, which is a different thing from mono?

I know there are workarounds. I'm dealing with a friend who was supposed to send me vocal files but sent them all as stereo waves with his audio on one side only. I'm getting around that by panning hard left and then sending that to a mono aux. But it seems weird to me that Logic no longer has a way of converting a stereo audio file into two separate mono files. Seems like a rather basic feature for a 'pro audio' program, no? Or maybe there's some other way to do it that I'm not aware of.
Old 5 days ago
  #418
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by timtoonz View Post
Nope. Just checked - if I open a mono file in RX, it opens in mono just fine. If I open any of the "Audio_SPLIT.R or SPLIT.L" files that Logic exported after "Convert interleaved to split", then they're still stereo files.
What does it say when you check the file properties in Finder?
Old 5 days ago
  #419
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by timtoonz View Post
Maybe Logic creates a "Split Stereo" format file, which is a different thing from mono?
And fwiw, yes, that is an option. It might be that there's something written to the file header. As said, I remember it as coming from the days of TDM hardware and/or SD2 files (likely the latter). From all I know, those were never interleaved stereo files (but split stereo) but Logic treated the L/R files as a single file. Maybe RX7 has a similar "history".
Or maybe it's a bug in 10.5? As said, I'm still on 10.4.8.
Old 5 days ago
  #420
Lives for gear
 
timtoonz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
And fwiw, yes, that is an option. It might be that there's something written to the file header. As said, I remember it as coming from the days of TDM hardware and/or SD2 files (likely the latter). From all I know, those were never interleaved stereo files (but split stereo) but Logic treated the L/R files as a single file. Maybe RX7 has a similar "history".
Or maybe it's a bug in 10.5? As said, I'm still on 10.4.8.
Thanks. And thanks for the Finder hint - checking there with 'Get Info' says it's a mono file. Bizarre. Now I'll have to see what other audio editors I have on my hard drive since Logic and RX are about all I use, and both of'em see it as 'stereo'. But I'll try the renaming thing and see how that works.

I'm not planning on testing out 10.5 for a couple weeks yet coz I'm in the middle of a few big Logic projects and I JUST went through months of fixes and workarounds and updates to get this new Hackintosh/Catalina system working.

I don't hate the idea of LPX adding some of Garageband's looping features... but those are pretty far down on my wishlist. Just once I'd like to see some Logic Pro features aimed at keeping the high-end recording-engineer types, or luring folks away from ProTools. Instead it seems like a constant barrage of EASY TO USE brightly coloured gizmos designed to get the GarageBand crowd to upgrade. That's not a bad thing.. but multiple SMPTE/Tempo lists and a dedicated headphone/control-room mixer would be pretty great too.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump