Logic X sounds better than Ableton Live?
-
- KVRAF
- 3978 posts since 20 Feb, 2004
Render a .wav from each DAW of Oddity playing the same MIDI sequence. Do this 5 times. Send the .wavs to a friend and have them give each file a random number, and keep track of which is which. Have your friend send them back to you. Try to decide which .wav came from DAW. Ask your friend how many you got right.
A well-behaved signature.
- KVRAF
- 3181 posts since 31 Dec, 2004 from People's Republic of Minnesota
For every DAW? Are they independent studies? Do they do recording, or VSTi rendering, or only audio playback? Can you cite one, please? I can't find any definitive ones. I know different DAWs use different dithering algorithms so that would make a difference, too.
-
- KVRist
- 83 posts since 11 Jan, 2017
Every DAW sounds the same digital as every computer !How can you ask this ?
-
- KVRAF
- 15513 posts since 13 Oct, 2009
acey wrote:I'm sure this topic has been discussed many times before. First let me say that I am a loyal Ableton fan, I own Ableton Live Suite and Push v.1 and the current version, Push 2. So, you could say I'm quit committed to Ableton as a DAW.
I recently picked up Apple Logic X, just to learn something new, and the price can't be beat for what it includes. As soon as I started using it, I noticed that the sounds blew me away. Both DAWS reside on the same Imac, same sound card. Now I realize that there are a lot of variables involved here that would account for the sound difference. But just today, I loaded up the plugin Oddity v. 1.3 by Gforce in Logic and couldn't believe it was the same plugin I used before. I always hated this plugin and never ever used it because it always sounded very thin and not exciting as I imagined it should sound. I've used it on Pc's and Macs, all in Ableton Live, never sounded good to my ears. It sounds amazing in Logic, punchy, dynamic, and fat, It's like having a brand new plugin.
What could account for this? Does Logic have a better "sound engine"?
Indeed it does. It's because it's been aged longer than Live's engine. It's something like wine, the older the sound engine, the more mature it is. Code that ages loses some of the bits around the edges and the loss of those bits is what rounds out the sound, making it more lively, more natural, dare I say, more analog.
Last edited by ghettosynth on Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
- KVRAF
- 4590 posts since 7 Jun, 2012 from Warsaw
ghettosynth wrote:Indeed it does. It's because it's been aged longer that Live's engine. It's something like wine, the older the sound engine, the more mature it is. Code that ages loses some of the bits around the edges and the loss of those bits is what rounds out the sound, making it more lively, more natural, dare I say, more analog.acey wrote:I'm sure this topic has been discussed many times before. First let me say that I am a loyal Ableton fan, I own Ableton Live Suite and Push v.1 and the current version, Push 2. So, you could say I'm quit committed to Ableton as a DAW.
I recently picked up Apple Logic X, just to learn something new, and the price can't be beat for what it includes. As soon as I started using it, I noticed that the sounds blew me away. Both DAWS reside on the same Imac, same sound card. Now I realize that there are a lot of variables involved here that would account for the sound difference. But just today, I loaded up the plugin Oddity v. 1.3 by Gforce in Logic and couldn't believe it was the same plugin I used before. I always hated this plugin and never ever used it because it always sounded very thin and not exciting as I imagined it should sound. I've used it on Pc's and Macs, all in Ableton Live, never sounded good to my ears. It sounds amazing in Logic, punchy, dynamic, and fat, It's like having a brand new plugin.
What could account for this? Does Logic have a better "sound engine"?
Some years ago I read here on KVR about a DAW that uses non-trivial summation on mixer, which make sit closer to analog summation. Not sure which DAW it was, but overall this theory could make sense.
Blog ------------- YouTube channel
Tricky-Loops wrote: (...)someone like Armin van Buuren who claims to make a track in half an hour and all his songs sound somewhat boring(...)
Tricky-Loops wrote: (...)someone like Armin van Buuren who claims to make a track in half an hour and all his songs sound somewhat boring(...)
- KVRAF
- 3181 posts since 31 Dec, 2004 from People's Republic of Minnesota
I can't believe I missed out on that! And I completely missed my misspelling. Son of a bitch I'm getting old!incubus wrote:Orlymasterhiggins wrote:Logically there shouldn't be a diffence
Sorry, couldn't resist.
- KVRian
- 663 posts since 28 Feb, 2003 from out
Listen with your ears instead of your eyes
-
- KVRAF
- 4814 posts since 17 Aug, 2004
DJ Warmonger wrote: non-trivial summation on mixer, which make sit closer to analog summation.
I know this is not your claim but i had to point it out and to laugh (not at you).
"non-trivial summation on mixer, which make sit closer to analog summation" is new in my list of snake oil nonsense claims. In fact it is so good it deserve to be printed out on T-shirt.
- KVRAF
- 3897 posts since 28 Jan, 2011 from MEXICO
They are, all of it are just maths, the theory and methods were developed a long ago and it is all avaible in academic literature. There is nothing secret about that.masterhiggins wrote:Unless, of course, they're all using the exact same method of recording/playback/summing.
dedication to flying
- KVRAF
- 3897 posts since 28 Jan, 2011 from MEXICO
Most DAWs allow you to choose which dithering algo you want to use.masterhiggins wrote:For every DAW? Are they independent studies? Do they do recording, or VSTi rendering, or only audio playback? Can you cite one, please? I can't find any definitive ones. I know different DAWs use different dithering algorithms so that would make a difference, too.
It is really not that hard to understand: in the digital domain everything is 1s and 0s, the goal for developers is not "the best sound" but that the results of all the equations employed is correct, that a file is 100% identical after passing through the DAW (if no operation was applied). If a DAW added anything just by playing something through it (with the same settings) it would be a failure.
dedication to flying
-
- KVRAF
- 3508 posts since 12 May, 2011
Wot I said, except for Harrison, who deliberately colour the output of their DAWs.rod_zero wrote:Most DAWs allow you to choose which dithering algo you want to use.masterhiggins wrote:For every DAW? Are they independent studies? Do they do recording, or VSTi rendering, or only audio playback? Can you cite one, please? I can't find any definitive ones. I know different DAWs use different dithering algorithms so that would make a difference, too.
It is really not that hard to understand: in the digital domain everything is 1s and 0s, the goal for developers is not "the best sound" but that the results of all the equations employed is correct, that a file is 100% identical after passing through the DAW (if no operation was applied). If a DAW added anything just by playing something through it (with the same settings) it would be a failure.
And don't forget to make sure your computer is properly warmed up...
-
Mister Natural Mister Natural https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=164174
- KVRAF
- 2834 posts since 28 Oct, 2007 from michigan
If subject X is even .1db louder than subject Z, the ear will perceive the louder subject as "better" sounding almost 99% of the time
expert only on what it feels like to be me
https://soundcloud.com/mrnatural-1/tracks
https://soundcloud.com/mrnatural-1/tracks
- KVRAF
- 5564 posts since 13 Jan, 2005 from the bottom of my heart
Another noob who think that DAWs sound different in terms of audible quality.
I hear it! I hear it!
I hear it! I hear it!
Whoever wants music instead of noise, joy instead of pleasure, soul instead of gold, creative work instead of business, passion instead of foolery, finds no home in this trivial world of ours.