KVR Audio

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:47 am

HanafiH wrote:
hifiboom wrote:or listen to this demo

in Cubase there seems to be some kind of extra processing when using VSt effects.... I can hear the reverb wobble at the first part.
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.wav

the dynamics in Samplitude stay constant and are just mixed in first part. Finally when you can only hear the tail of the reverb, it also sounds more structured....
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.WAV

Yep, that's the difference.

This one needs to be saved for posterity.

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:48 am

Cordelia wrote:You're missing the sarcasm in his post.
Still waiting, years now, for the simple well constructed test that proves the "DAW summing difference" theory. Two files- that's all it would take. I would think, if there were any truth to this theory at all, that just one of the rabid golden ears would have produced these files by now, that they would be eager to share this with all of us.

There actually often is a difference. Due to floating point precision and different volumes (different reference point for 0dB, this is not an error). The difference between for instance Cubase and Podium when using 16 tracks of white noise (different noise per channel) and two fx sends per channel is at about -150dB or so (after normalizing both mixdowns to the same level). I don't have the test files left any longer, but this is the result I got far ago when I actually did the test. Which was boring btw

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:00 am

stefancrs wrote:
Cordelia wrote:You're missing the sarcasm in his post.
Still waiting, years now, for the simple well constructed test that proves the "DAW summing difference" theory. Two files- that's all it would take. I would think, if there were any truth to this theory at all, that just one of the rabid golden ears would have produced these files by now, that they would be eager to share this with all of us.
There actually often is a difference. Due to floating point precision and different volumes (different reference point for 0dB, this is not an error). The difference between for instance Cubase and Podium when using 16 tracks of white noise (different noise per channel) and two fx sends per channel is at about -150dB or so (after normalizing both mixdowns to the same level). I don't have the test files left any longer, but this is the result I got far ago when I actually did the test. Which was boring btw

Nice try Stefan, but do you think you'd be having to explain this to anyone who had even the foggiest idea of what -150dB actually means?

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:03 am

hehehe

I thought Cordelia asked for proof for the OTHER theory though. That summing in differents hosts results in different audio. Since it was the "golden ears" people that should supply the proof. You don't need golden ears to do ridicously precise measurements...

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:07 am

nufflink,
Are you implying that I don't understand what -150dB means, or are you saying that any difference of -150dB is ridiculous to discuss anyway?

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:09 am

It is ridiculous to discuss it. You will get the same difference with just one track and no send fx.

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:14 am

Cordelia wrote:nufflink,
Are you implying that I don't understand what -150dB means, or are you saying that any difference of -150dB is ridiculous to discuss anyway?

Yes. To both. If you understood the first you wouldn't ask the second.

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:27 am

nufflink,
You're pissing me off. You have completely misread my posts. Of course I understand what -150dB means. As stefancrs correctly understood, I asked the second question to give you a chance to clarify yourself and correct your misunderstanding. I have been supporting your position through this entire thread. As I posted earlier:

popsych posts of Samplitude:
"It's sound is the best"
nufflink writes: "You're a fantasist mate. We see them all the time here. You won't do any test. You'll wriggle out of it or just disappear."
Did I miss something or are we still waiting for the test proof from popsych?
popsych backtracks:
"To make things clear i never claimed the reason it sounds good is the engine."
Did I miss something, or is the title of this thread "SAMPLITUDE RULES (DAW Summing)"?
I am really open to hearing these summing differences for myself, so if you can hear the difference, post some files and prove it once and for all. Please. The next time someone claims Reason sounds better than FLStudio, which has more air than Nuendo, which secretly compresses more than Cubase, we can just post the link to the unbiased test files and be done with it.
By the way, my dad can beat up your dad, AND my host is bigger than your host.

Please read more carefully.

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:41 am

So, having been unclear the first time, let me rephrase my question:
nufflink,
Are you being a dick, misreading my post, and sarcastically implying that I don't understand what -150dB means, or are you (I hope) simply saying what we all understand, which is a difference of -150dB is ridiculous to discuss?

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:42 am

My apologies if I'm pissing you off, it happens.

You're quite wrong about me misreading your posts, I didn't read them at all. Except the one I responded to. Which I would have responded to differently had I realised it was rhetorical.

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:47 am

OK,
Just a misunderstanding.

stag · Post by **stag** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:46 am

Colonel Flashback wrote:
stag wrote: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?

laugh all you want, but that´s what i meant, Sonic Foundry has something to it, i can´t explain what it is but maybe some vegas user can.

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:49 am

You don't want the host to clip. And it's up to the user to make sure it doesn't.

stag · Post by **stag** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:02 pm

stefancrs wrote:You don't want the host to clip. And it's up to the user to make sure it doesn't.

That´s rigth, I set my master fader to the max and always have close attention to indidual tracks on the project not to clip.
I know i could fiddle with the master bus fader but a trusted engineer thougth me this way and frankly it goes well with my genre of music.

Anyway i agree that digital(numeric) summing should be the same as long as the user knows what he´s doing...
but i like more Vegas, i hope i´m not offending anyone with this opinion... geez, i hope nobody gets offended because i like the same brunettes as blondes, as long as they have a big bottom end.

jens · Post by **jens** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:14 pm

HanafiH wrote: SONAR on the other hand doesn't drop center db for panning law, but raises side.

in fact you can chose between various panning-laws...