Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Starship Krupa

"All DAW's sound alike" and other wisdom of the Internet

Recommended Posts

@ensconced Whatever I did back then with Mixbus I believe it was discounted by Jeff or someone as flawed and so I backed away from that part of the discussion.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bapu said:

Whatever I did back then .. was discounted by ... someone as flawed.

 

Story of my life.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, lads for making me aware of what was discovered in these old discussions.

Yeah, it may be annoying to have it brought up yet again, but how does someone like me learn of the research that people like Jeff have already put into the subject if I don't ask? This forum hasn't been around that long. Neither have I. I just got back into DAW recording about half a dozen years ago. I feel like I know diddly compared to you all.

I'm happy to be made aware of information that runs counter to these particular expectations of mine. It makes for a much simpler world! And it helps to feel more confident as well, that I can go between DAW's and not be so concerned that their rendering engines are going to gank the sound.

Still, even after reading Ableton's paper, and being made aware of Jeff's tests, I hold that it's possible that the playback engines are not necessarily playing (heh) by the same rules that the rendering engines are. This might be the case if the programmers are playing (ugh) tricks in order to ensure gapless playback. Like my observations of Mixcraft's playback vs. CbB's, where I saw CbB directly streaming every file in real time, where Mixcraft had no disk read activity? Something is different there.

Also, look how many user-facing choices there are between playback quality and rendering quality. We get to choose whether our plug-ins are upsampled, which stretching and pitch shifting algorithms the DAW uses, etc.

Given what I've learned here, DAW manufacturers seem to take more care than I thought about keeping things clean in the realm of render. When it comes to the land of playback, however, I'm still not so sure. And it's playback that we're thinking of, isn't it, when we talk about  the "sound" a DAW has? Or is it?

But when it comes to audio playback, I'm very picky. I use Music Bee in ASIO or WASAPI mode or VLC in Audio Memory Output mode so as to minimize meddling from Windows as much as possible. I try to obtain my music in lossless form if possible.                                                                                                                                      When I found out about "bit-perfect" playback and learned how to eliminate or minimize resampling, that was what made the difference in my listening experience. Even with a Realtek chip, getting past all the fiddling that OSes do is what makes the biggest difference (to however my ears listen).

I'm also pondering the matter of MAGIX (and Ableton themselves in that document) stating that they "improved" the sound of their audio engines, which of course implies that there was room for improvement. That's straight from the horse's mouth. And still they don't say if it was playback or rendering or both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mixes suck and I can't sing.

So which do I need: a new DAW, a new interface, or more RAM?

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bitflipper said:

My mixes suck and I can't sing.

So which do I need: a new DAW, a new interface, or more RAM?

 

 

Better drugs? 😆

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except I...uh....just tried it and it didn't work. 🙁

Conditions were: dataset of three sine waves, 1K, 440, and 30, panned 50, 50 and C, and the 30 fader pulled down 5dB. Render 44.1/32 bit float.

I tried it with CbB and Mixcraft, using both Mixcraft 8 and 9 to provide a bit of methodology reality checking for myself. Made it a 3-way test to make sure that my dataset and methodology were at least on planet Earth.

Mixcraft 8 and 9 null each other out, although not down to "absolutely," but reasonably so. A barest flicker of activity on Audacity's lowest meter bar. Between Cakewalk and either of the Mixcraft results I can fiddle with the level and make them null each other so that it reduces about 12dB when they're mixed, but they really don't null.

Does this "prove that Mixcraft and Cakewalk sound different from each other?" Of course it doesn't.

It suggests to me that they are likely to produce results that sound different from one another when put to practical use. Which is what my empirical observations and those of other similarly experienced observers also suggested.

It also suggests that what may be true when comparing Studio One to SONAR to Pro Tools may be less so when comparing SONAR/Cakewalk to Mixcraft to Wavelab to Pyramix to Vegas to Audition to Samplitude....you get the idea, there are so many pieces of audio software out there, maybe he got lucky and found the ones that played by a particular set of rules.

Maybe I botched my tests in some way....which would at least demonstrate how easy it is to get two different DAW's to produce different results even when you're throwing sine waves and numbered knob settings at them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In talking about practical use, I remember when I looked at lots of electronics specs and realized how they tested all of it. 

"Lab testing" and real use differ greatly. Probably much the same or similar for recording software...I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Starship Krupa said:

That's straight from the <marketing> horse's mouth.

Nuff said.

Edited by Bapu
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, are you saying that the sound of my voice droning on about this has perfectly nulled itself?

In that case, I accept the award!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Starship Krupa said:

Wait, are you saying that the sound of my voice droning on about this has perfectly nulled itself?

In that case, I accept the award!

Just having some fun with it Krupa. In all seriousness if that's possible in the CH  this is an interesting subject and I'm glad you brought it up again. Things have changed since those last threads on the subject. I believe more DAW makers have added some 'secret sauce' to their mixing busses. ...busses? is that a real word? I dunno. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I know, it's all in good fun, and thanks for showing interest.

I knew it would kick the hornet's nest, but was kinda surprised to find out that the subject had been so "done to death." People have such long memories! Although, well, that just means I get to hear about whatever conclusions were already drawn without it devolving into a screaming match.

I don't mind being the poster child for cluelessness. Think of it, though, I'm a "new guy," I only showed up with the advent of BandLab, but that was over 2 1/2 years ago, which is actually a long time in computer years. I've worked for software companies that came and went in that time frame. 2 Christmas parties and they were done. O Addstor, The Learning Company, O Berkeley Systems, who, after all, remembers them?

Anyway. You think some sly dogs might have added some non-linearity? That actually would not surprise me to find out. I'd be disappointed but not completely surprised to find out that someone had erred on the side of even-order harmonics in their summing/resampling algos. I hadn't thought of anyone except maybe Harrison doing that until you said it.

Considering all the effort, or at least the hype, that goes into "making digital sound analog," no, it wouldn't surprise me at all.😄

I usually don't get too wound up about someone's 19th nervous Neve emulation, though. My "rational" side suggests that it's the 21st century and that it seems weird to be limited by what was possible in hardware in 1972. But then I get the Beat Magazine free license for T-Racks VC-670 and throw it across my drum bus just to try it and 😲. So much for that concept.

  • Great Idea 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Starship Krupa said:

I knew it would kick the hornet's nest...

Definitely NOT something you'll want to do around here!  We just had a notice in our neighborhood gossip forum that the so-called Asian "Murder Hornets" have arrived in our county and one of the posters had one chase him in his backyard...  As far as I'm concerned, these things are the matter that nightmares are created from!

murder-hornet-washington-trap.jpg

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Krupa apoligies on temporarily departing the subject. It's all Craig's fault.

Oh great Craig, like we didn't have anything else to be concerned about :D OTOH I was looking for ways to airlift cargo around my back yard. True story....I ordered a pair of shoes online. I know. Bad idea but with COVID and all that's what I did.  My wife sees this HUGE beetle on our steps not far from the shoe box. We did a search on this thing...it isn't from around here. Ended up in the septic system headed to the local pump house. Likely it came from that shoe box. Took a ride from out west. I could have put a saddle on that thing.

These have been seen too...no it isn't photoshopped. No don't try snopes. The guy is a not legit. Don't believe me? Check out snopes.

The mantis wasp.....

 

 

mantis 2.jpg

mantis wasp..jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Starise said:

Krupa apoligies on temporarily departing the subject. It's all Craig's fault.

Oh great Craig, like we didn't have anything else to be concerned about :D OTOH I was looking for ways to airlift cargo around my back yard. True story....I ordered a pair of shoes online. I know. Bad idea but with COVID and all that's what I did.  My wife sees this HUGE beetle on our steps not far from the shoe box. We did a search on this thing...it isn't from around here. Ended up in the septic system headed to the local pump house. Likely it came from that shoe box. Took a ride from out west. I could have put a saddle on that thing.

These have been seen too...no it isn't photoshopped. No don't try snopes. The guy is a not legit. Don't believe me? Check out snopes.

The mantis wasp.....

 

 

mantis 2.jpg

mantis wasp..jpg

What the actual f ?

Suddenly the murder hornet actually looks cuddly!

I wonder: although internet pundits might prove them identically lethal - which one gives you a more pleasant death?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say.  "I don't mind dying I just don't want to be there when it happens." - Woody Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"He died peacefully in his sleep."

The preferred line I want in my obituary (as long as it's accurate!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, craigb said:

"He died peacefully in his sleep."

The preferred line I want in my obituary (as long as it's accurate!).

In that case it probably wasn't either of those critters that got you. Being on this forum as long as we have been is proof you can't die from ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...