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
"Pro-Tools vs Other Daw" What I Found Out...! Audio Interfaces
Old 18th August 2007
  #1
Gear Head
 

"Pro-Tools vs Other Daw" What I Found Out...!

Hi guys!

First of all, I found myself comparing two MOTU Interfaces connected to the same PCIe-424 (using itunes on a Mac Intel):

-Motu 2408 MK3;
-Motu 24i (Old one only 24bit/48KHz and not i/o!)

The old Interface (24i) sounded better... richer and clearer. Not a big difference... but noticeable.
Then I compared the 24i to a Digi002 (the same way). The Motu24i sounded waaay better!

Now...
when I opened a PT session (recorded previously on an old Protools Mix 24) on ProtoolsLE 7.3.1 and played it through the Digi002, I noticed that it sounded ok.
Then I "consolidated" the files in that Protools session and imported them to Digital Performer 5.12, to mix it playing through the "Better Sounding Interface (24i)"... And... it looked like it sounded muddier in quite a noticeable way! Damn!

So.... is it the algorithms? Does Protools use secret encoding and decoding on Sound Designer2 files? Is it the Hardware/Software combination?

I´m a DP user for some years now, and my recorded stuff with my MOTU interfaces and DP always sounded pretty good... The stuff recorded on Protools really sounds better on the "worse" interface, with the "worse" software... with the same Brand!!!

Any thoughts about this? Is dfegadProtools Hard/Soft really the best combination?

Greetings to all u Gear-o-Maniacs,
Toni
Old 18th August 2007
  #2
Gear Addict
 
mOjO FET's Avatar
 

Pro Tools' audio engine is not the most musical one.

As much as I like the software I would not want to put any of my music through Pro Tools, it kills the mojo and sounds plastic.

Have you tried to open the old PT mix files directly in DP without consolidating them in PT 7.3 first.

Michael
Old 18th August 2007
  #3
Lives for gear
 
ryst's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdown View Post
And... it looked like it sounded muddier in quite a noticeable way! Damn!
You lost me here.
Old 19th August 2007
  #4
Gear Head
 

Sorry, if I write confusing...

What I´m saying is that Original SD2 files sound better on a "Cheap" Protools system (digi002), then on Digital Performer 5.12 with an overall better sounding soundcard (Motu 24i+PCIe-424).

Is it the encoding?
Old 19th August 2007
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Gear Tramp's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mOjO FET View Post
Pro Tools' audio engine is not the most musical one.

As much as I like the software I would not want to put any of my music through Pro Tools, it kills the mojo and sounds plastic.

Have you tried to open the old PT mix files directly in DP without consolidating them in PT 7.3 first.

Michael
Bull****.

heh
Old 19th August 2007
  #6
Lives for gear
 
ryst's Avatar
 

I still don't undertsand why people make these tests. Music is art. It's not about software program sounds "better'. It's about making good music, isn't it?
Old 19th August 2007
  #7
Gear Guru
 

you have two variables - the presumed difference in the converters in the interfaces, and the presumed differences in the softwares. your test does not isolate these variables well enough.

it seems premature to conclude that Pro Tools has some secret process that 'hoards' the good sound for itself. tutt

how many things did you listen to in the first test to 'determine' that the MOTU was truly the 'better sounding' interface? 1 or 2 songs? or dozens of different types of music, soloed instruments etc etc.?

If you only listened to a few things, maybe the MOTU interface has some characteristics that happened to flatter your test songs, but was unflattering to the song recorded in PT. Was the PT session similar music to the finished tracks from iTunes? All mixed down and mastered?

what about going in the other direction? Isn't Digital Performer capable of playing back through Digi hardware like the 002? What if you take your consolidated-from-PT Digital Performer session and play it back through the 002? will it still sound 'wrong'?
Old 19th August 2007
  #8
Lives for gear
 
peat's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryst View Post
I still don't undertsand why people make these tests. Music is art. It's not about software program sounds "better'. It's about making good music, isn't it?
well said

my thoughts exactly
Old 20th August 2007
  #9
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px inset ;" class="alt2"> Originally Posted by ryst
I still don't undertsand why people make these tests. Music is art. It's not about software program sounds "better'. It's about making good music, isn't it?
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
well said

my thoughts exactly
I find it really annoying, when someone gives this easy kind of answer, instead of "Sorry, my friend, I don't know..." or even "I didn't understand your description..." or whatever...

What you both said, is the unquestionable truth about music recording! WE ALL KNOW THAT!!! Right?????

But are't we all making some kind of tests and comparisons with our gear (hard or soft)??

Isn't this what Gearslutz is all about???!!! The ART of Hearing??

I really hope to find someone that can relate to this issue.
I really am convinced that SD2 files are better decoded (sound better) with Digidesigns Soft and (cosequently) Hardware, than with DP5 using any of the previously mentioned Interfaces.

Greetings, and thanks again.
Toni
Old 20th August 2007
  #10
Gear Guru
 
rickrock305's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdown View Post
it looked like it sounded muddier in quite a noticeable way! Damn!



how does that work? exactly what does muddy look like?
Old 20th August 2007
  #11
Gear Guru
 
rickrock305's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdown View Post
Isn't this what Gearslutz is all about???!!! The ART of Hearing??



i always thought gearslutz was about spending way too much money on gear that you probably can't afford and don't need. save the empirical testing for the geekslutz.
Old 20th August 2007
  #12
Lives for gear
 
fuzzface777's Avatar
 

I have heard the PT bouncing process has gotten goofy for some folks with huge sessions and a gazillion automations, but that is it........... hope that helps
Old 20th August 2007
  #13
Lives for gear
 
thesteve's Avatar
I am going to have to agree that this test is not really a very good indication of anything other than that the 2 systems sound different. It could simply a testament to how badly the export from ProTools degrades the sound (I have read about that quite a bit on here). I bounced files from my Radar into pro tools and it sounded rather pooptastic (with all faders at unity), so we put it into a laptop running Nuendo and used the smae 2ch D-A (lucid DA96), and it sounded a little better. It does illustrate that daws sound different, but I always like to try to avoid changing platforms when tracking.
Think about this, if DP has less top end, or upper mid definition, then when you are tracking and mixing, you will adjust your mic placement and tones to compensate...
If you then move the files into PT, all of the things you did to make it sound good in DP may be the opposite of what was needed in placement, mic choice and tone for PT.
Old 20th August 2007
  #14
Lives for gear
 
andremattos's Avatar
 

I've used PT for many years ..
now i am using DP 5 , and i'm in love!!
DP , fantastic DAW !
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
chessparov / So much gear, so little time
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump