KVR Audio

kyodeejay · Post by **kyodeejay** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:40 am

Hi,

I was testing Samplitude 11 demo, tons of people tell me that it sound better that other DAWs: Reaper, FL Studio, Live, Orion, Cubase, Sonar... etc etc... and better that my usual and lovely host. But I didn't found nothing special in its sound. Just a bunch of features and internal instrument and fx, nothing when I compare them to my VST collection. I even could say that all those host sounds better that Samplitude (is there any "international measure" about how everything should sound?), although it wouldn't be accurate.

I don't know if it really sound better or people are really subjetive (fanboys) with the programs they own (or my ears are dirty

). How can I measure that it really sounds "better"?

TristezaOrange · Post by **TristezaOrange** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:50 am

You cannot because it doesn't.

siriusbliss · Post by **siriusbliss** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 8:45 am

All DAW's audio engines SHOULD be the same nowadays.

A lot of mastering engineers like Samplitude and Sequoia.

Greg

states · Post by **states** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:09 pm

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:26 pm

It doesn't sound better at face value, as everyone says this just can't be. But the product can indeed sund better at the end due to elements in the DAW and I believe this to be true with Samplitude, at least for me. I can't speak for all DAWs, but I have FL, AA, eXT (both), Sonar 5 and have tried demos of many more and I like the mixer in Samp the best as well as the native fx. Sonitus fx I also like a lot but I can make a better sounding mix (imo) using Samplitude and some of the features it has.

dgkenney · Post by **dgkenney** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:03 pm

These discussions get quite silly after awhile. If there was a DAW that in and of itself sounded better than all the other DAWs don't you think the commercial markets would all be using it. The commercial market is all about competition and having an edge up on the others. Top studios worry more about external gear, room acoustics and talented producers and engineers than they do the software. Workflow, dependabiity and speed of operation are certainly considerations as is support, but the audible difference in DAWs was put to bed a long time ago. And besides, if you are producing anything akin to rock'n'roll you wouldn't hear it on your iPod anyway.

Now monster cables..that's a different subject all together.

Dan

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:37 pm

Hink wrote:It doesn't sound better at face value, as everyone says this just can't be. But the product can indeed sund better at the end due to elements in the DAW and I believe this to be true with Samplitude, at least for me. I can't speak for all DAWs, but I have FL, AA, eXT (both), Sonar 5 and have tried demos of many more and I like the mixer in Samp the best as well as the native fx. Sonitus fx I also like a lot but I can make a better sounding mix (imo) using Samplitude and some of the features it has.

But that's the thing. The host doesn't sound better. Different plug-ins may sound better or worse, different workflow features may inspire more creativity, etc. But that's not the host itself sounding better(as you acknowledged in your first sentence).

FWIW, Sonar has come a VEEEEERY long way since version 5, including it's plugs(Sonitus is at the bottom of the spectrum compared to what it has added). I'll agree that the FL effects for the most part aren't as good, and EXT is a bit lacking in that department.

So I agree that as a package, one host can sound different. Better? That's up to each user obviously. Not everyone will ever agree on what "better" is, as you know.

Brent

GraphMaN_USA · Post by **GraphMaN_USA** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:07 pm

There was a benchmark report on DAWs a couple of years ago that actually found differences illutrated with nice colorful charts, I am sorry I do not have the websave handy, but I do recall that expensive DAWs were not particularly better using the esoteric benchmark (it was not something useful like Frquency Response)than inexpensive DAWs. Agreeing with previous posts, workflow is probably the ultimate consideration. Do you do audio only? Mostly MIDI? Loop based? Need portability to a ProTools studio? Need x64 OS compatibility? Cross-platform compatibility? Samplitude falls short if you replied yes to many of those questions. In its niche however, Samplitude is a solid product...ymmv. Cheers!

kyodeejay · Post by **kyodeejay** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:31 pm

Naaaah I don't need any new host. I've already one (Podium). But I was curious why the samplitude fanboys brutally state that samplitude audio "engine" was the best, when I cannot find any difference.

siriusbliss · Post by **siriusbliss** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:40 pm

If anything it's Samplitude's LACK of sound that I prefer.

A plugin developer friend of mine (yes, subjective reference, but whatever) mentioned to me over a year ago that the latest releases from several DAWs have included updates to audio engines that essentially brought all the major DAWs into sync. with regards to audio 'quality' - mostly also due to preparation for current 64-bit implementation and beefier headroom availability through advancing DSP developments, and more RAM overhead.

So, yes listening all the way through the chain of plugs and out the backend at mix stage is important, and there IS the potential to hear differences due to plugs and various gain-staging and phase-related issues - but at this point it's entirely subjective.

FWIW some people may actually still prefer the old 8-bit samplers and grainy converters

- maybe that's their preference.

And yes, unless you're doing film scores, or surround, or blue-ray, or some other 'high-end' audio production, then if the end destination is some lame mp3 listening through grainy converters and earbuds, then the DAW audio quality game is ENTIRELY subjective.

Greg
(who also owns Live 8.x, Sonar 5, Cantabile....)

paveloso · Post by **paveloso** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:53 pm

siriusbliss wrote:Why Samplitude sounds better?

It doesn't.

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:56 pm

koolkeys wrote:
Hink wrote:It doesn't sound better at face value, as everyone says this just can't be. But the product can indeed sund better at the end due to elements in the DAW and I believe this to be true with Samplitude, at least for me. I can't speak for all DAWs, but I have FL, AA, eXT (both), Sonar 5 and have tried demos of many more and I like the mixer in Samp the best as well as the native fx. Sonitus fx I also like a lot but I can make a better sounding mix (imo) using Samplitude and some of the features it has.
But that's the thing. The host doesn't sound better. Different plug-ins may sound better or worse, different workflow features may inspire more creativity, etc. But that's not the host itself sounding better(as you acknowledged in your first sentence).

FWIW, Sonar has come a VEEEEERY long way since version 5, including it's plugs(Sonitus is at the bottom of the spectrum compared to what it has added). I'll agree that the FL effects for the most part aren't as good, and EXT is a bit lacking in that department.

So I agree that as a package, one host can sound different. Better? That's up to each user obviously. Not everyone will ever agree on what "better" is, as you know.

Brent

isn't that exactly what I said?

Of course Sonar has come along way since 5, but that doesn't mean I gain anything by revisiting every host and possibly changing my workflow every time a new version comes out. As much as music means to me I have to admit eating and shelter come first, we're not all rich radio celebrities like you

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:04 pm

GraphMaN_USA wrote:There was a benchmark report on DAWs a couple of years ago that actually found differences illutrated with nice colorful charts, I am sorry I do not have the websave handy, but I do recall that expensive DAWs were not particularly better using the esoteric benchmark (it was not something useful like Frquency Response)than inexpensive DAWs. Agreeing with previous posts, workflow is probably the ultimate consideration. Do you do audio only? Mostly MIDI? Loop based? Need portability to a ProTools studio? Need x64 OS compatibility? Cross-platform compatibility? Samplitude falls short if you replied yes to many of those questions. In its niche however, Samplitude is a solid product...ymmv. Cheers!

which ones do you think Samplitude falls short on? Cross platform, yes it falls short, portability to PT I think may have changed but I'm not sure, 64 bit yes (but I'm not all that on 64 bit yet), Auido only, samp is awesome, midi was an issue to some ike 4 versions ago but I think you'll find that is not the case "in it's niche" is imo completely off the mark, but as you say ymmv

bobbybland · Post by **bobbybland** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:13 pm

Comparing the same sounds (PLUGINS,OR AUDIO CLIPS FOR THAT MATTER) from FL8 to Samplitude I would say there's something else going on under the hood. Audio engine.1's and 0's Whatever you want to call it. If you can't hear a difference,perhaps your DA converters aren't up to par. There's definitely a difference in sound quality.I would say the same thing about plugins, like gigastudio's engine vs. Kontakt's engine,huge imo. Of course they could be using a limiter on their output,who cares,if it sounds better to you,then you use it. Make your own decision.

tadam · Post by **tadam** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:32 pm

Why Samplitude sounds better?

Believe!

i keep asking that after all these years: Why does Samp suck GDB on all other departments but it sounds like partying in 1999?

Oh! btw pro audio gear doesn't have to sound great, good or bad.
Pro audio gear has to sound clinically truthful, without a hint of sound flattering or otherwise.