Sorry if i made it seem i am implying you are not making sense. What i really mean is that since the ouput of a vst is a string of bits which it exports via a dll function (or whatever, haven't coded vst or intend to) the possibility for the export to wav to be different than the output is very slim, and is there only in the event of plugins detecting whether they are in play mode, or in export mode e.g. Auto mode in Voxengo plugs. I seriously doubt anything like this is happening and i would like to inquire which host you're using.LoopFilth wrote:You're right computers don't make mistakes... Its the programmers that supply the 'magic'popsych wrote:I on the other hand know there are no magicall reasons in software, and i can tell you that what loopfilth said makes no sense, viewed as a bug or otherwise. The 96khz to 44.1 khz sounding better is a matter of algorithm working better. Mainly a) Pushing anti alias in inaudible frequencies and b) more accurate filters.greendoor wrote:Something i've found with VSTs and hosts - trust nothing. In "theory" they should behave logically, but often in practice they don't. If something appears to sound better for no logical reason, it probably does. It can be years before a fault is acknowledged and fixed. I notice some synths sound much better at 96kHz, therefore it makes good sense to export audio at 96kHz, and then reimport to your 44.1kHz project anyway. That's logical enough. For backup purposes, you are much safer if you have rendered your VSTis to audio. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if VSTi's that are rendered seperately might sound better than those that are rendered together with the mix. I don't think there is a universal answer to this, other than check with your specific combination of software and don't trust what should happen "logically".
What do commercial production studios do on stereo imaging?
-
- KVRist
- 301 posts since 5 Jun, 2004
-
- KVRist
- 141 posts since 13 Mar, 2004 from USA
I tend to agree - in SONAR I don't find an audible difference between the vsti/softsynth and bouncing to audio. I do bounce to audio though to save CPU and add audio effects + i find the relationship of an audio track vs. a vsti track (while technically audio track) is easier to get levels and panning set correct (may just be me...popsych wrote:I on the other hand know there are no magicall reasons in software, and i can tell you that what loopfilth said makes no sense, viewed as a bug or otherwise. The 96khz to 44.1 khz sounding better is a matter of algorithm working better. Mainly a) Pushing anti alias in inaudible frequencies and b) more accurate filters.
OTOH... depending on the software you're using, it wouldn't be suprising to find a difference between vsti and bounced audio...
sheesh... with over a billion transitors and millions of lines of code all flying around at over a gigahertz, it's practically a miracle this stuff works at all... could even be the hardware behaving differently...
Glenn
-
Stupid American Pig Stupid American Pig https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=4753 - KVRAF
- 7065 posts since 25 Nov, 2002 from not sure
Everybody knows that all pro studios use the reason Mclass mastering stereo imager... 
-
- KVRist
- 301 posts since 5 Jun, 2004
Any sequencer worth it's money (even if free the bandwidthgullfo wrote:OTOH... depending on the software you're using, it wouldn't be suprising to find a difference between vsti and bounced audio...popsych wrote:I on the other hand know there are no magicall reasons in software, and i can tell you that what loopfilth said makes no sense, viewed as a bug or otherwise. The 96khz to 44.1 khz sounding better is a matter of algorithm working better. Mainly a) Pushing anti alias in inaudible frequencies and b) more accurate filters.
sheesh... with over a billion transitors and millions of lines of code all flying around at over a gigahertz, it's practically a miracle this stuff works at all... could even be the hardware behaving differently...
) should sound identical if it supports 32 bit float export (if it doesn't just use voxengo recorder - did i forget to mentioni 
Aleksey?). If the hardware did that, then it woulnd't be digital but analog (and it would sound so much pHaTTeR warmer and all together so much better 
)-
- KVRer
- 13 posts since 29 May, 2003 from Brisbane, Australia
Ok I don't use export mode when I'm mixing all tracks to a single track. I bounce all trax down in realtime. I'm using SX2 as my host. Like u said there should be no difference between the modes, but for one reason or another I prefer to bounce vst'i to audio, cuz, well thats how the pros do it, hehepopsych wrote: Sorry if i made it seem i am implying you are not making sense. What i really mean is that since the ouput of a vst is a string of bits which it exports via a dll function (or whatever, haven't coded vst or intend to) the possibility for the export to wav to be different than the output is very slim, and is there only in the event of plugins detecting whether they are in play mode, or in export mode e.g. Auto mode in Voxengo plugs. I seriously doubt anything like this is happening and i would like to inquire which host you're using.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
It is? Maybe when they need to save CPU...
-
- KVRian
- 1394 posts since 28 Mar, 2002 from Austria
No one mentioned the plugin WiderBoyPro or Ozone3's Multiband Stereo-Imager here. Both does a great job on stereo imaging.rpc9943 wrote:just wondering, what the hell do commercial production studios do to their mixes? I mean like in ultra corporate formula mixes I always hear this... very wide stereo, like almost sparkly stereo imaging going on. I just wonder how the hell they do it. When I load some tracks through mda stereo it ALMOST sounds like it... What the hell do they do ?! I think I'd like to floor all my mixes with it, whatever the hell it is. Anyone know? For a good example listen to like stuff in the theater before movies, its AWFUL music but I really like the sparkly imaging going on!
What you here in theaters before movies is just a different delay from different speaker positions to your listener position. You could reach this effect with a stereo Multitap delay or 2 simple stereo delays (delays set in milliseconds with no feedback!) as Send-FX of your track with small different delay-settings . You could try the freeware from Voxengo (TempoDelay,StereoTouch).
Last comment: If the mix lacks initially in stereo-quality, no plugin can do wonders on the final mix.
-
- KVRist
- 301 posts since 5 Jun, 2004
Really ? I thought PROS only used RTAS, TDM and HTDM instrumentsLoopFilth wrote:Ok I don't use export mode when I'm mixing all tracks to a single track. I bounce all trax down in realtime. I'm using SX2 as my host. Like u said there should be no difference between the modes, but for one reason or another I prefer to bounce vst'i to audio, cuz, well thats how the pros do it, hehepopsych wrote: Sorry if i made it seem i am implying you are not making sense. What i really mean is that since the ouput of a vst is a string of bits which it exports via a dll function (or whatever, haven't coded vst or intend to) the possibility for the export to wav to be different than the output is very slim, and is there only in the event of plugins detecting whether they are in play mode, or in export mode e.g. Auto mode in Voxengo plugs. I seriously doubt anything like this is happening and i would like to inquire which host you're using.
, not VST. I mean, come on VST doesn't even require proprietary hardware or limit your tracks unreasonably and you have the nerve of calling it pro . On a more serious note, i can't see ANY reason for exporting to wav, unless i'm low on CPU , or like me prefer mixing in another program. I do production in Logic, use voxengo recorder to export 32 bit float ( altough 24 bit woulnd't be bad by a long shot) and import into samplitude to do mixing. Much prefer samp for audio work, built in plugins and better support for recent vsts. Then again you implied the latter does not hold true for you and so i am inclined to say you really have no reason to put your disk (or you) through this strain.
-
- KVRist
- 421 posts since 12 Jun, 2004
Yes, i think the thread-opener means the radio-stereowidth-effect. Orban has implemented the 222A in their newest and expensive machines (8400) as digital emulation.
well, i'm sill waitin' for this transient-based effect for powercore, uad, creamware or as native effect ..
well, i'm sill waitin' for this transient-based effect for powercore, uad, creamware or as native effect ..
-
- KVRist
- 255 posts since 13 Apr, 2005
A lot of the wide stereo imaging comes from the original recordings (a group of background singers and a stereo pair of mics, sometimes more). Some of it also comes from hard panning. Sometimes one background singer will be panned hard left and the other right. It makes things sound very full.
-
- KVRian
- 769 posts since 2 Apr, 2005
Most people using DAWs and VSTs won't be using any true stereo (binaural) recording techniques. So for most of us we have what is called "pan pot stereo", which is not real stereo and fairly limited. It's possible to pan sounds beyond hard left & right, by using psychoacoustic tricks. This is because our brains place sounds in space according to delays between left and right ears, and also by level and eq (our head gets in the road, which muffles sounds from certain directions). So with pan pot stereo, you can't get any further left than hard left - but with pychoacoustic tricks using sound from both speakers, but calculated use of delays and eq, you can make a sound appear to be further 'left' than hard left, or even behind you. Very cool. Bob Katz sells a magic box that does some tricks - very expensive, but this is probably being used on a lot of successful records. It's a patented method, but I believe I know how to achieve the same effect using phase and delay effects, all available from Voxengo for free.