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
Logic Degrading Kontakt 4!!!
Old 19th January 2011
  #61
Gear Addict
 

ok guys this is a tough one kontakt vsl's harp and string ensemble...

output are set exactly the some on each daw no other processing

wow its close but theres a difference listen carefully especially at the end around at 37 seconds them last five chords!
Attached Files

strings.mp3 (1.84 MB, 205 views)

strings 2.mp3 (1.75 MB, 144 views)

Old 19th January 2011
  #62
Gear Addict
 
Night Stalker's Avatar
 

I totally agree with Elvis.

If you listen to the files in a good listening environment, its easy to spot that the 2nd file is indeed in mono. You need to re do the test. No intent on being negative, its just the way it is so please check it and re do.
Old 19th January 2011
  #63
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
what GS needs is a set of Audio test material which is prepared and ratified by the high end mastering guys. not prepared on any of the DAWs or Samplers if possible.

Then those signals would be consistent starting sources for subsequent tests in Samplers and as Audio Tracks in DAWS etc.

I had a quick look at those pianos in iZotope RX. I couldn't detect any major differences, or many minor ones for that matter. but its hard because the material is complex material to look at.

btw, different samplers have different velocity curves. at least the used to. Those were tested in an SOS article a while back.
EXS had the most linear velocity curve at the time. so there could be different velocity to db ratios in those cases.
in this test where using kontakt 4 only and the same exact sound in different daws to me theres a clear winner but again were casting votes
Old 19th January 2011
  #64
Gear Addict
 
Night Stalker's Avatar
 

the strings file :
the 1st file is louder ( whether that is done mistakingly or its an issue with the daw ) will make everything stand out more. 1st file is cleaner and more crisp. Will listen more and do my own tests. thanks for the thread
Old 19th January 2011
  #65
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Night Stalker View Post
I totally agree with Elvis.

If you listen to the files in a good listening environment, its easy to spot that the 2nd file is indeed in mono. You need to re do the test. No intent on being negative, its just the way it is so please check it and re do.
i did check it if you download it and import it ,it will be stereo but

it sounded that way live in that daw and im looking at it now everything is stereo

ok check this out its a loop in the loop theres a delay (echo) in the second file the daw completly cut off the top end where the echo is

ok now when i close the daw and open the pluging standalone mode it sounds exactly like the 1st file and that was done on a different computer all together im trying to figure out the same thing im working at it now
Old 19th January 2011
  #66
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Night Stalker View Post
the strings file :
the 1st file is louder ( whether that is done mistakingly or its an issue with the daw ) will make everything stand out more. 1st file is cleaner and more crisp. Will listen more and do my own tests. thanks for the thread
thank you!
Old 19th January 2011
  #67
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Night Stalker View Post
I totally agree with Elvis.

If you listen to the files in a good listening environment, its easy to spot that the 2nd file is indeed in mono. You need to re do the test. No intent on being negative, its just the way it is so please check it and re do.
im sitting at my computer now, when you make the vi slot it doesnt give you a option to make it mono and everything after that is stereo i even bounced a full wave it has the same mono like sound in thats daw? did you read the op

this last test was tougher but one is a little more 3d and warm, and made with the same set up


i have a clue but not sure about everything
Old 19th January 2011
  #68
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
getting tired here.. but yes a (piano) was possibly mono.. but as was mentioned earlier, the panning law could play a role. if the sides were dropping 3bd for example, the difference would equate to more mono sense.

tracking down exactly what is going on there and why would be useful.

EDIT: sorry I'm making mistakes here.. it was the blind 1 tests which had the mono.

Time for Bed..
Old 19th January 2011
  #69
Gear Addict
 

Lol wasn't mono for the people that have logic did you notice how the mono circle once clicked turn to 2 circles then the track suppose to be stereo hmmm logic still crash with native instruments still sticky notes as well since L5

I'm starting to thing the engine is out dated

It's the same logic with more in it

I'm a logic man but Apple has the resources to fix this

It will help everyone if there is something to be looked at

I'm gonna record kontakt from cubase to logic

And see how it sounds as a wave reminder kontakt standalone sounded like cubase

It's funny cuz cubase is on pc but kontakt standalone was in MAC hmmm this is a good thread indeed !
Old 19th January 2011
  #70
Lives for gear
 
valis's Avatar
Muser is correct about pan law, Logic is -3dB compensated and Cubase is (and possibly Kontakt in standalone mode) -3dB by default. -3dB compensated and -3dB are not the same, and Logic and Cubase can both be changed on a project by project basis in project settings to your preference. Some installations of Cubase 5/6 seem to default to "equal power" which is again different...and will certainly reveal a major audible difference immediately in terms of overall apparent loudness. I actually don't remember the pawn law of Kontakt itself, it would be useful for the sake of this discussion if someone does.

Overall though I think that we've run the gamut of past discussion patterns on this subject already...not sure what there is to discover here. If I was interested in spending more than a minute or so on this I would probably make a set of test audio files as suggested (sins/saws/a few sweeps/noise/impulse) and create a Kontakt program to accompany them with everything at default or disabled. Then accompanying Cubase, Logic, standalone, etc projects... and then uncorrelated audio examples for the 'blind test' portion (not labelled according to source.) This would make the test repeatable..

However I suspect you're having a combination of user error and/or some specific settings with your machine(s) that is affecting things. One good example is what happens to iTunes and some other Core Audio apps lately if the primary system output is changed while the application is open. Also the normal Logic troubleshooting routine would have been one of the first things I would have done if Logic was acting strangely compared to other tools.
Old 19th January 2011
  #71
Lives for gear
 
davey boy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvis Gotta Gun View Post
piano3.wav is downloading as piano2 file?!
Opps! Fixed it. And no, these are not the same file. I think the only difference in sound is associated with the fact that with this instrument there's a round robin sample thing going on so when played back it's slightly different each time in spots. I tried a null test on 2 of them and some notes canceled while others did not. Or, maybe that's a midi timing thing? Don't know. Overall though I think they're "the same."
Old 19th January 2011
  #72
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
Valis I wish someone would do something on this at sometime. at least in order to achieve some disclosure about what the effects in certain conditions might end up being.

Edited:
any pan law (possibly) will have most emphasis on the power in the center and not the sides. so as never to peak above zero.
assuming the pan law also applies to a stereo signal and not just a mono signal.

so a stereo audio stream or interleave file in a channel with a pan on it is not aways necessarily going to be a pan even.
so those might not even be subject to the pan law because those are generally balances and not pans.

I would think they are subject to the same pan law but I just don't know what the logic of applying a pan law to a signal which you are hoping to (balance). you would be getting quite a complex operation in regards to mid side balance if a pan law is applied to a signal path which is already stereo.

and this is aside from any plugin which has it's own pan law theory applied.
you could theoretically end up with tiers of pan laws in operation. :/

maybe someone should start a thread on this. I'd certainly like to know more about it.
Old 19th January 2011
  #73
Lives for gear
Hey Folks,

Wow this thread got revisited for sure! I had no idea as I am currently learning Pro tools 9. I had to see what the debate was about(Logic Vs. Protools). I went one step further and tested a few daws. I have spent time with Reaper, Cubase and Protools since starting this thread. I can tell you one thing for sure, all Daws do not sound the same in a real world mix!

The main thing I learned though was that Logic needs some serious upgrading in the sound engine department. My comments relate specifically to making electronic based music ( V/I's and samples with real instrument overdubs). IN this type of production all the other daws besides Logic offered more detail in the midrange or less distortion! This is for me what is wrong with Logic. Also the bloated bottom is a problem. If I track a commercial mix into Logic then listen to it, there is more color added then in any other DAW I tried. There is always more Bass than on the reference recording. Also if you listen to the original file and then the Logic recording at low volume, you can clearly hear less clarity in the Logic recording.

This was enough for me top realize that I need to change my main platform. The Sound Library in Logic is in major need of overhaul for fidelity, tuning and presets. There are many sample based patches that are poorly tuned in spots and most presets open far to hot signal wise. Many of the presets have a bunch of plug in on them and when stripped away the raw sound is very poor! Though the variety of sound that come with Logic is great the PT9 instruments are just better sounding!

So I am sorry for not seeing the thread but I have been super busy getting up to speed in protools!

BTW, I tested Kontakt in the different daws mentioned above. I set Pan Laws when possible. What I found was that the sound of the Daws affected the plug ins being used. Without a doubt logic was the least defined in the mids. The Mids are where the record lives and so soon my records won't be living in Logic. I hope apple gets it together but I have my doubts.

If Logic was given a premium sound engine, made stable without bugs and had it's sound library updated it would be the premier DAW! I just don't think that is gonna happen. Instead people will continue to steal great features from it and pass it by..............


Jazztone AKA Reborn
Old 19th January 2011
  #74
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by valis View Post
Muser is correct about pan law, Logic is -3dB compensated and Cubase is (and possibly Kontakt in standalone mode) -3dB by default. -3dB compensated and -3dB are not the same, and Logic and Cubase can both be changed on a project by project basis in project settings to your preference. Some installations of Cubase 5/6 seem to default to "equal power" which is again different...and will certainly reveal a major audible difference immediately in terms of overall apparent loudness. I actually don't remember the pawn law of Kontakt itself, it would be useful for the sake of this discussion if someone does.

Overall though I think that we've run the gamut of past discussion patterns on this subject already...not sure what there is to discover here. If I was interested in spending more than a minute or so on this I would probably make a set of test audio files as suggested (sins/saws/a few sweeps/noise/impulse) and create a Kontakt program to accompany them with everything at default ore disabled. Then accompanying Cubase, Logic, standalone, etc projects... and then uncorrelated audio examples for the 'blind test' portion (not labelled according to source.) This would make the test repeatable..

However I suspect you're having a combination of user error and/or some specific settings with your machine(s) that is affecting things. One good example is what happens to iTunes and some other Core Audio apps lately if the primary system output is changed while the application is open. Also the normal Logic troubleshooting routine would have been one of the first things I would have done if Logic was acting strangely compared to other tools.
I'm on it going to logic prefs now if I can't find it ill ask were to find it question if your car changed fuel economy from drive to drive and its not known for you to POP the hood and reset the main how would you feel all this sounds great


but you said logic change the pan laws on its own well I hope that's the problem because I do want to use the program that I paid for ill be right back
Old 19th January 2011
  #75
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayclas View Post
I'm on it going to logic prefs now if I can't find it ill ask were to find it question if your car changed fuel economy from drive to drive and its not known for you to POP the hood and reset the main how would you feel all this sounds great


but you said logic change the pan laws on its own well I hope that's the problem because I do want to use the program that I paid for ill be right back
Ok reborn thanks for your comment you hit the nail on the head in my string mp3 the louder was logic

I didn't want to change anything but the lower one was cubase but its much warmer and cleaner at louder volume it really stand out I think logic normalized it I'm looking in logic's prefs to give it a tune up
if I find something ill rebounce all four files

but cubase sound better and logic coloured the song probably giving more common frequencies but its being notice
Old 19th January 2011
  #76
Gear Addict
 

ok i changed the pan law from -3db to 0 and it got louder but still no double tap delay at the top its totally gone in logic

all that talk is great and dont matter if logic engine it the same as version 3 what did they improve besides add more surround channels

look guys if somebody know something tell me cuz it aint the pan laws logic murdered this sound go back to blind mp3's thats how it sounds right now

logic did the same thing to one of my mixes like 4 months ago i would post it but you guys will find something slick to say ,but mixing for 3 hours and it still sound bad cant be out worded

im just trying to get help the string demo was close so now its certain frequencies i guess im not gone im gonna figure this out
Old 19th January 2011
  #77
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
Valis I wish someone would do something on this at sometime. at least in order to achieve some disclosure about what the effects in certain conditions might end up being.

any pan law will (possibly) will usually have most power and assuming the pan law also applies to a stereo signal and not just a mono signal.

so a stereo audio stream or interleave file in a channel with a pan on it is not aways necessarily going to be a pan even.
so those might not even be subject to the pan law because those are generally balances and not pans.

I would think they are subject to the same pan law but I just don't know what the logic of applying a pan law to a signal which you are hoping to (balance). you would be getting quite a complex operation in regards to mid side balance if a pan law is applied to a signal path which is already stereo.

and this is aside from any plugin which has it's own pan law theory applied.
you could theoretically end up with tiers of pan laws in operation. :/

maybe someone should start a thread on this. I'd certainly like to know more about it.
well said your exactly right ,changing the pan law only made it louder it didnt do anything else it doesnt apply
Old 19th January 2011
  #78
Gear Addict
 

ok fellas this is the latest update!

i imported cubase wave into logic and finally it sound stereo with all the delay taps at different times left and right.still dont sound as open as cubase but a big improvement over logic playing kontakt im gonna load a new song and try logic again

so far it seems that stereo samples in kontakt thru logic is the main problem and most of kontakt patches might look stereo but if you go to the waves there mono wave

ok 20 mins later another update kontakt has a 16 mono output option as well as a 16 stereo output (im glad i made up with elvis) but ok reborn back to your op !

if you ever used the 16 mono output so you can process them separately thats the problem for some reason it kills the sound ill do another mix later a true blind test!

btw cubase doesnt give you a 16 mono output just 8 or 16 stereo

there very very close let me know what you think ! ill post my thoughts later
Attached Files

blind 1.mp3 (2.86 MB, 127 views)

blind 2.mp3 (2.80 MB, 134 views)

Old 19th January 2011
  #79
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
That second one sounds a bit weird to me. it's harder to hear the distortion in the bass that happens every now and then. it is sort of masked.

do these files null ? youd have to use SonalKsis FreeG to maybe get exact levels for the null.
Old 20th January 2011
  #80
iWS
Gear Head
 

Hi all

Interesting discussion, and I know not the first in this subject area.

I too have noticed these differences in sound engines, and how I wish I hadn't, as I have about 12 yrs if logic under my belt.
I guess one if the reasons is more apparent for me now is that PT9 is now native and makes it easier to do a direct comparisons playing through the same hardware, where as in the past i put it down to differences in hardware, different float point etc. ( I have a tdm rig here too ).

I've found the PT bounce to sound more open and clear.

My latest little test was to bounce the same hi hat file in both programs. In both I sent to an aux with the same echo boy preset at exactly the same level and pan law etc.
The difference bugged me, it's subtle , but I can hear ( and you have to focus your listening on the repeats first) the sound of the echoes degrades in logic makin it sound as if its disappearing behind the source almost to mono. In PT it stays clear and therefore sounds wider for longer.

Although no that scientific, I reasoned that for my mixing the cumulative effect of this accross the whole mix, particularly with delays and reverbs, which I use to widen tracks, would be significant.

So as much of a dog as it is I bounce all my tracks out of logic and drag them into PT for mix down.
Old 20th January 2011
  #81
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iWS View Post
Hi all

Interesting discussion, and I know not the first in this subject area.

I too have noticed these differences in sound engines, and how I wish I hadn't, as I have about 12 yrs if logic under my belt.
I guess one if the reasons is more apparent for me now is that PT9 is now native and makes it easier to do a direct comparisons playing through the same hardware, where as in the past i put it down to differences in hardware, different float point etc. ( I have a tdm rig here too ).

I've found the PT bounce to sound more open and clear.

My latest little test was to bounce the same hi hat file in both programs. In both I sent to an aux with the same echo boy preset at exactly the same level and pan law etc.
The difference bugged me, it's subtle , but I can hear ( and you have to focus your listening on the repeats first) the sound of the echoes degrades in logic makin it sound as if its disappearing behind the source almost to mono. In PT it stays clear and therefore sounds wider for longer.

Although no that scientific, I reasoned that for my mixing the cumulative effect of this accross the whole mix, particularly with delays and reverbs, which I use to widen tracks, would be significant.

So as much of a dog as it is I bounce all my tracks out of logic and drag them into PT for mix down.
wow thankz jws!

thats great to know because thats the big thing im hearing how the reverb well reverb

looking at the wave shows proof as well

we pay more on mic pre's to sound better why stop there or are we stopping there? nope not i

cubase gives me that same openness and also it seems logic is just harsher while cubase is thicker and warmer ,most of use have multiple daws

apple just have to work on the engine and what if they comeback stronger everybody wins?

nuendo was made to compete with protool or surpass it so no wonder cubase sound so good
Old 20th January 2011
  #82
Hot
Here for the gear
 

Taken from a post on Apple discussions:

If you take the effect and instrument plugins of the DAW out of the equation, the sound engine is essentially what routes and mixes the audio streams and does the final quantization before the audio hits the output interface. Features like on-the-fly sample rate conversion (rarely implemented) and real-time time-stretching/pitch-shifting might be happening too, but that's not the core functionality.

There are not many design choices when it comes to mixing. In fact, you have two basic options: Floating point or fixed point number representation. These days floating point is standard, with the famous exception of Pro Tools, and there mostly for historical reasons.

Floating point allows for another option, namely that of precision: 32 bit or 64 bit (with 25 and 53 bit absolute precision, the rest is exponent). Practically all DAWs use 32 bit internal representations with their plugins optionally switching to 64bit internally if it's needed.

Mixing comes down to scaling and adding. Interestingly, there might be a tiny difference between the DAWs, but then not really. For floating point, the precision of addition depends on the order of the terms you add. That's an effect due to the fact that floating point precision is relative, not absolute. The best strategy for adding numbers is to sort them before adding them and then add them in that sorted order. No DAW does that, for obvious reasons. Anyhow, it's not really that important. Because audio data usually doesn't span a very large range of magnitudes, and only then that effect would show in a noticable way.

So we can assume that all DAWs add numbers with the same precision. The very last stage, converting floating point to integers for output with the device driver is a little trickier. Quantization noise might sneak in there. Assuming your hardware/driver does 24 bit audio, then the quantization noise will be at around -144dBfs. That's very low. Assuming you're outputting to 20 bits, it will still be -120 dBfs, and the usual 96 dBfs for 16 bit. You can make a difference there, by dithering the signal and applying a noise shaping algorithm to move the noise to the frequency ranges where your ear is less sensitive. However, this effect is mostly only noticeable if you go for a 16 bit target resolution, like in CDs. And for regular volume listening while mixing at higher bit depth it would not be noticeable.
But DAWs might in fact differ there.

So when you use a plugin like Kontakt, then the chain of processes happening, independent of the DAW in use, is essentially: Taking the samples from the plugin, scaling them, maybe adding some other stuff to them, quantizing them and giving them to the audio interface. With exception of the quantization, there is nothing that could happen here to degrade the sound quality. No matter how many "audiophiles" insist on one "audio engine" sounding better than another one. Especially "transparency", "high end" and "low end" are in no way affected by the DAW processing chain, unless you use plug-ins.

So, the bottom line is that if Kontakt 4 really sounds different from the stand alone version when playing in logic, it's either a user error (using different quality settings inside Kontakt) or a general problem with Kontakt and in Native Instrument's responsibility.

There is practically NO WAY logic could mess this up. It would have to be so very broken that we would have noticed before
Old 21st January 2011
  #83
Gear Addict
 

I agree hot the 2nd set of mp3's are very close one being a little warmer and wider in frequency band

but the other having a little more mids with a very minute amount of harness

But like you said could be due to dithering and if one only has one daw then the final step matter just as much ?

I erased the mp3's that had stock compression,equipment and limiting I think that could help more because that's a more practical use ?

I also for good measure used uad similar plugs on the third mp3 and it killed the stock plug ins

But I think I found reborns's issue with logic !!!!!!

Cubase doesn't give you a 16 mono out for kontakt(only 16 stereo), logic gives both and yes user era on my behave as well but there so close !

now ill dither them in the same program !

There both great daws logic has better loops cubase has better functionalily I have both and love both ill do a more complicated mix using stock
Plugins and dither them in the same wave editor so it will put the same about of dirt on them !
Old 21st January 2011
  #84
16942
Guest
I think if people put more time into worrying about their writing and mixing skills and less about the physical properties of the sound engine of their DAW, D/A converters, etc. they would make better sounding music.

At the end of the day, it is more the guy than the gear.
Old 21st January 2011
  #85
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
in my experience, people who end up asking these questions are usually the ones who (have) spent the time.
That's why they can hear oddities.

it doesn't mean the oddities are a function of the Audio engine.
but in the same respect, it doesn't mean the oddities aren't there, where-ever they are emerging from.

personally I think the most important aspect is the lack of precision in the ability to obtain very fine levels in the
automation and in the Level Faders.

but that wouldn't explain why putting a stereo interleaved file in one DAW as opposed to another might yield different results.

imo, bouncing down internally is not adequate. it needs to be externally captured in order to eliminate every possibility.

but one thing seems true to me.. there is (no) reason why a pan law should apply to a stereo interleaved audio channel.

pan on a stereo channel should be a balance and not a pan with a law.

a pan law on a stereo sound source is effectively a pan + a mid side relative change from what I can see.
not that I've really looked into them, but you get the idea.
Old 21st January 2011
  #86
Here for the gear
 

I have noticed that Pan Laws is the audiophiles new favorite.
For example claiming that one pan law is better than the other one. Do they really know what it is? It may not be as mystic as you think it is actually
Old 21st January 2011
  #87
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashermusic View Post
I think if people put more time into worrying about their writing and mixing skills and less about the physical properties of the sound engine of their DAW, D/A converters, etc. they would make better sounding music.

At the end of the day, it is more the guy than the gear.
This is true. However if all my snare samples sound not right to me in the fundamental area (175hz-400hz) and I use a lot of processing and time to get it right to my ears and then I load the same wave into another DAW flat no processing and all of a sudden it just need a Hi pass filter and that's it - chances are I am going to do better work in the second program because I will spend more time on the music and less on the presentation! This is what I am experiencing. There is a greater clarity in Protools and sounds blend different for me. I have done 3 mixxes so far and my plug in use is way down! Also I have had to go replay parts in the original Logic session because the dynamics are too wide but I could not hear that in Logic. Believe me I want Logic to be right in all areas, especially since punching in is basically crippled in PT9 Native because you can't turn off input monitoring! So now I am stuck mixing in Protools, finishing up composing in Logic and doing punch ins in Logic. This sucks because inspiration strikes when you hear everything mixed as it is going to sound and the vocalist wants to punch in a part or build a part. Problem is I have to do that in Logic and now they are not monitoring the mix just as they were hearing it. It is a problem but after hearing what my music sounds like in protools 9 there is no going back.............
Old 21st January 2011
  #88
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot View Post
Taken from a post on Apple discussions:

If you take the effect and instrument plugins of the DAW out of the equation, the sound engine is essentially what routes and mixes the audio streams and does the final quantization before the audio hits the output interface. Features like on-the-fly sample rate conversion (rarely implemented) and real-time time-stretching/pitch-shifting might be happening too, but that's not the core functionality.

There are not many design choices when it comes to mixing. In fact, you have two basic options: Floating point or fixed point number representation. These days floating point is standard, with the famous exception of Pro Tools, and there mostly for historical reasons.

Floating point allows for another option, namely that of precision: 32 bit or 64 bit (with 25 and 53 bit absolute precision, the rest is exponent). Practically all DAWs use 32 bit internal representations with their plugins optionally switching to 64bit internally if it's needed.

Mixing comes down to scaling and adding. Interestingly, there might be a tiny difference between the DAWs, but then not really. For floating point, the precision of addition depends on the order of the terms you add. That's an effect due to the fact that floating point precision is relative, not absolute. The best strategy for adding numbers is to sort them before adding them and then add them in that sorted order. No DAW does that, for obvious reasons. Anyhow, it's not really that important. Because audio data usually doesn't span a very large range of magnitudes, and only then that effect would show in a noticable way.

So we can assume that all DAWs add numbers with the same precision. The very last stage, converting floating point to integers for output with the device driver is a little trickier. Quantization noise might sneak in there. Assuming your hardware/driver does 24 bit audio, then the quantization noise will be at around -144dBfs. That's very low. Assuming you're outputting to 20 bits, it will still be -120 dBfs, and the usual 96 dBfs for 16 bit. You can make a difference there, by dithering the signal and applying a noise shaping algorithm to move the noise to the frequency ranges where your ear is less sensitive. However, this effect is mostly only noticeable if you go for a 16 bit target resolution, like in CDs. And for regular volume listening while mixing at higher bit depth it would not be noticeable.
But DAWs might in fact differ there.

So when you use a plugin like Kontakt, then the chain of processes happening, independent of the DAW in use, is essentially: Taking the samples from the plugin, scaling them, maybe adding some other stuff to them, quantizing them and giving them to the audio interface. With exception of the quantization, there is nothing that could happen here to degrade the sound quality. No matter how many "audiophiles" insist on one "audio engine" sounding better than another one. Especially "transparency", "high end" and "low end" are in no way affected by the DAW processing chain, unless you use plug-ins.

So, the bottom line is that if Kontakt 4 really sounds different from the stand alone version when playing in logic, it's either a user error (using different quality settings inside Kontakt) or a general problem with Kontakt and in Native Instrument's responsibility.

There is practically NO WAY logic could mess this up. It would have to be so very broken that we would have noticed before
Everything you are saying may be 100% true but the problem is that plug ins and operations are performing better in other DAWS than Logic. For instance try using Flex Audio anything in Logic then Protools and tell me which one has less audible artifacts. Or record a reference song into Logic and Protools Via your digital interface and then set levels pan law and everything else the same and tell me which one sounds most like the reference. There is just work Apple has to do. Question is will they?
Old 21st January 2011
  #89
Lives for gear
 
dannygold's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
good opportunity for a phase cancellation test.
I doubt a phrase inversion test would work with midi in the picture because of the sloppy nature of midi timing. It's not sample accurate, I wouldn't think. That being said I doubt Kontakt sounds different DAW to DAW.
Old 21st January 2011
  #90
Lives for gear
 
dannygold's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reborn View Post
Everything you are saying may be 100% true but the problem is that plug ins and operations are performing better in other DAWS than Logic. For instance try using Flex Audio anything in Logic then Protools and tell me which one has less audible artifacts.
That's TOTALLY different because elastic audio and flex time use a stretching algorithm. Saying flex time and elastic audio sound different is like saying Dverb and Silververb sound different... of course they do because there's unique code there. Don't conclude from this that the summing engine of Logic vs. Pro Tools is different or playback of Kontakt are different. Very apples and oranges.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reborn View Post
Or record a reference song into Logic and Protools Via your digital interface and then set levels pan law and everything else the same and tell me which one sounds most like the reference.
I have done that and tested via phase inversion and they always cancel. A far better test that what I THINK I'm hearing. I can prove they are the same.
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…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Fezzle / Music Computers
0
Beastie / Music Computers
1
whinecellar / Music Computers
15
quincyg / Music Computers
4
gigantorbuzz / So much gear, so little time
14

Forum Jump
Forum Jump