SAMPLITUDE RULES (DAW Summing)

[stag]

The funny thing is that i can´t explain this on cientific terms but the 32 bit mixing precision engine that SAW, Samp and DigiDesign say they use has other saying that internal engine of Nuendo runs at 80 bit.

frankly before mix down the best sound there is Steinberg, but if any clip is present there we got the less forgiven audio engine of them all no matter what dithering is used,
but as long as ther is a close atention to cliping everything is just fine.

that said the best summing of all DAW is Sonic Foundry, once again don´t ask me why, it just sound better to me.

[jupiter8]

WHAT?????We have a summing debate and i was'nt invited????

Get a grip guys. Summing is just that,summing! 1+1=2.That is all there is to it. To say one program has better summing than another is just IGNORANT!!!!!!
Being they have the same bitdepth of course.

There is ony ONE way to sum signals together.What is so bloody hard to understand???

[Colonel Flashback]

frankly before mix down the best sound there is Steinberg, but if any clip is present there we got the less forgiven audio engine of them all no matter what dithering is used,
but as long as ther is a close atention to cliping everything is just fine.

so Sonic Foundry has better sounding digital clipping?

[herodotus]

speed huh?

but do you have computer hacking and nunchuck skills?

what about cage fighter reflexes?

Cage fighting is for wussies.

These days Log Fighting is how real men prove their mettle.

[woc53]

In discussions like this somebody always says something like the following, but I think it's true nonetheless:

Even if it were possible that one DAW "sounds" different from another, the real-life variations in signal chains and signal processing, mixing and mastering skills, dithering and SRC algorithms, mean that perceived differences among DAWS don't amount to a hill of beans in the end.

Now if a "hill of beans" suddenly goes way up in value, I retract my statement.

[HanafiH]

"dB law flaw: When trimming multiple event volumes, automation points or linked mixer faders, the dB relation is not retained. "

Fixed in Cubase SX 3.0.2 (and quoted from the official bug fix list) and present in every earlier version except the last unsupported hotfix to SX version 2.2, March 2005.

Until recently, there was a real problem with every version of Cubase. Not withstanding THAT, there's another real difference in Cubase (at least) that will affect the percieved quality of mixes. The default panning laws. Cubase panning laws were different from absolutely everybody else because Steinberg used a scientific max amplitude of a 0db sine to calibrate their meters, contrtrary to AES methodology, and consequently doesn't (or maybe didn't by now) conform to audio standard AES-17. Coupled with inept db law, this meant that the loudness map of the Cubase stereo image shifted subtly according to mix levels. SONAR on the other hand doesn't drop center db for panning law, but raises side.

But what the heck, just screaming summing is summing is so much easier for tiny minds to comprehend.

[hifiboom]

you really think a sound software is just adding 1+1=2 ?

Then I would use my calculator for sound applications....

A small implementation bug in the parameters processing can have drastic results on soundquality...

while comparing just simple wav files may survive the nulling test, but what if you do extensive use VST plugins

There also was a bug in Pentium system where 0+1 was 0 or something like that...

The bigger the program gets the more bugs it has...

And from the fixing list of Cubase, you can learn that Steinberg has much skill in programming bugs...

to fresh up your memories:
Many versions were so unstable, that you could not even work for half an hour without crashing...

so its not difficult to believe that there are bugs in the audio signal path, too

[Colonel Flashback]

"dB law flaw: When trimming multiple event volumes, automation points or linked mixer faders, the dB relation is not retained. "

Fixed in Cubase SX 3.0.2 (and quoted from the official bug fix list) and present in every earlier version except the last unsupported hotfix to SX version 2.2, March 2005.

Until recently, there was a real problem with every version of Cubase. Not withstanding THAT, there's another real difference in Cubase (at least) that will affect the percieved quality of mixes. The default panning laws. Cubase panning laws were different from absolutely everybody else because Steinberg used a scientific max amplitude of a 0db sine to calibrate their meters, contrtrary to AES methodology, and consequently doesn't (or maybe didn't by now) conform to audio standard AES-17. Coupled with inept db law, this meant that the loudness map of the Cubase stereo image shifted subtly according to mix levels. SONAR on the other hand doesn't drop center db for panning law, but raises side.

But what the heck, just screaming summing is summing is so much easier for tiny minds to comprehend.

what's that got to do with summing in Samplitude?

[HanafiH]

"dB law flaw: When trimming multiple event volumes, automation points or linked mixer faders, the dB relation is not retained. "

Fixed in Cubase SX 3.0.2 (and quoted from the official bug fix list) and present in every earlier version except the last unsupported hotfix to SX version 2.2, March 2005.

Until recently, there was a real problem with every version of Cubase. Not withstanding THAT, there's another real difference in Cubase (at least) that will affect the percieved quality of mixes. The default panning laws. Cubase panning laws were different from absolutely everybody else because Steinberg used a scientific max amplitude of a 0db sine to calibrate their meters, contrtrary to AES methodology, and consequently doesn't (or maybe didn't by now) conform to audio standard AES-17. Coupled with inept db law, this meant that the loudness map of the Cubase stereo image shifted subtly according to mix levels. SONAR on the other hand doesn't drop center db for panning law, but raises side.

But what the heck, just screaming summing is summing is so much easier for tiny minds to comprehend.

what's that got to do with summing in Samplitude?

Listen very carefully, I shall explain this in simple words. How many Steinberg programmers does it take to change a light bulb? 1.00000235.

Now in a world of theoretical perfection there is one and only one mathematical reduction of numbers that corresponds to a correct bus sum. Well some developers are better than others. However the quality of DAWs is not solely dependent upon bus summing.

Now you can chose. I really don't care at all what you want to believe. You can use a audio engine built by the people who first invented phase linear processing, and recognized for it by both Waves and Weiss, and who have a history of delivering exactingly perfect audio engines, or you can buy software from a company that could not deliver a stable output buss for three and a half years.

I don't care what you chose to do. But you ought to try Samplitude demo before thinking that summing is identical in all hosts, or that because of it and it alone, Samplitude can't possibly sound better.

[Colonel Flashback]

Ugh, nasty combination, samp fanboy + steinborg hater, guess that explains your arrogance...fwiw i use neither of them.
Listen very carefully, I shall explain this in simple words: SUMMING IS SUMMING - and that's what the discussion was about. (Babya Logic possibly excluded)

Keep your HDD cool as even in Samplitude the bits will distort if they get to hot!!

What am i doing posting in a 1 year old thread anyway?
Bye!

[lex_strooder]

here is a summing test for you all...

lets say you have audio volumes between (and including) 0 and 10... (10 is max and everything above it will be cliped) and they can only be whole numbers

add two tracks with volumes 6 and 6 (equals 12) and then you devide it by number of tracks = 2... (6+6)/2 = 6 .. so far so good

and now add 5 and 6... (5+6)/2 = 5.5 and depending how you round it of you get 5 or 6 ???

summing is a magic process... most daws sounds different


btw, in summing, 1+1=1

[HanafiH]

[HanafiH]

Nope pig shit ignorance is pig shit ignorance.

[jupiter8]

Panning laws dictate how much amplitude will be when panning differently. A mono signal panned in the middle will have lower amplitude because otherwise it would sound louder in the middle than panned to either side.Because it would be played from 2 speakers instead of one.

Different pan laws will of course affect percieved sound quality as louder sounds better.However if you mix accordingly THERE WILL BE NO DIFFERENCE.

Second , a stereo signal panned fully left/right WILL SOUND NO DIFFERENT. The mid won't magically disappear as some here seems to think.

And SUMMING IS SUMMING. Adding channels together means just that. ADDING 1+1=2. There is no other way to do it. So how little you think of Steinbergs programmers,i promise you they got that part right.

But keep on posting funny pictures and insults, instead of even remotley back up your opinion. That'll make you look really mature.

[hifiboom]

Here are two sound examples of a bassline played in cubase and one played in Samplitude without mixing....

Just VSTi bass + reverb....

and it has a slightly different sound

Samplitude sounds cleaner in the upper and lower end, the cubase version seems more muddy.

While the differnce is marginal, you`ll hear it in a complete mix very clearly....

http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.wav

http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.WAV