KVR Audio

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:16 pm

I am not sure, but just mixing noise seems to be sensless...

What did you expect as result?

jupiter8 · Post by **jupiter8** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:27 pm

OK, tried some more. Same 16 noise samples plus the phase inversed Cubase mixdown. I cracked the master volume in Samplitude without the phase inversed copy and got 5-6 dB overs. When i switched on the phase inversed Cubase mixdown Samplitude reported out volume
-100 dB!!!!!

jupiter8 · Post by **jupiter8** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:29 pm

hifiboom wrote:I am not sure, but just mixing noise seems to be sensless...

What did you expect as result?

It is a scientific way of proving that there is no difference in the Samplitude summing when compared to other hosts.

But you knew that did'nt you.

peejunk · Post by **peejunk** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:52 pm

jupiter8 wrote:OK, tried some more. Same 16 noise samples plus the phase inversed Cubase mixdown. I cracked the master volume in Samplitude without the phase inversed copy and got 5-6 dB overs. When i switched on the phase inversed Cubase mixdown Samplitude reported out volume
-100 dB!!!!!

It should mean ~106dB difference, but it's greatly nconclusive. The real question now would be is samplitude able to detect and display lower reported volume. If not this is so far the only difference that could actually leave a 24bit soundcard (and is even close to being hearable).

I also doubt the Audition readouts. If I remember correctly it's documentation states that it dithers on every operation. If you do phase canceling in it's audio engine there is a slight chance that the noise you're witnessing is simply dithering (tho I don't see the purpose of dithering at 32 bit) and has nothing to do with audio (i.e. the actual difference should be lower).

Theoretically, unless some hosts use packet summing and others don't (tho I doubt any do as it's a SSE operation), same FP operations should result in binary same results. Packet summing could leave tha accumulated value longer in the internal 80-bit float domain but even then the difference between discrete sums and packet sums should be below -300dB (if audio editors even report this).

dhanjit · Post by **dhanjit** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:55 pm

Thanks for resurrecting this one hifiboom.

A great example of how to generate heat rather than light.

tetraplan · Post by **tetraplan** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:55 pm

Hell is:
Having to spend eternity discussing audio-engines.

Groet, Erik

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:14 pm

dhanjit wrote:Thanks for resurrecting this one hifiboom.
A great example of how to generate heat rather than light.

lol

come on, nobody will die because of this thread.

And at least nobody has to read it....

jupiter8 · Post by **jupiter8** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:19 pm

I just figured out a way to record the result into Samplitude with 32 bit float precision. But i'm not sure i did it right so tomorrow i will RTFM and bury this thread once and forever.

Peace.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:27 pm

all academic wankery around -150dB aside...

Who here has a soundcard or DA that can even do the 110dB s/n ratio?

That's right, nada! (even us RME users realistically get about 100dB s/n when it finally hits the monitors)

When claiming something actually "sounds better" (like the many too enthusiastic fanboys do in this thread), you can only really do it with a group of people using the ABX procedure. Otherwise personal preferences and placebo will ruin everything.

Meanwhile, have fun getting the current test procedure right. I'm going to have to resign here.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:39 pm

Sorry, back from retirement to tell a story, like any good old pensioners do.

There's a legendary mastering engineer called John Westman. He's merits to a legend do not come from mastering though. He made outrageous claims about hearing things that aren't possible to hear. For example,

When testing with a group of people, he reportedly was the only one who could "hear" the difference in sound of a DAW system when the external harddrive was on the floor, and sitting on softmounts. Knowing how soft mounts can help in all kinds of mechanical equipment coupling resonance problems, guess which one he preferred?

The way the test was set up, was that the people alwats saw the harddrive being moved.

I wonder if John Westmans personal preferences had any influence on the sound he heard?

HanafiH · Post by **HanafiH** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:41 pm

See the pyramids across denial...

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:46 pm

Oh I see you prefer fat sounds with warn and wide open space. You also like it to "crack" right, and have a wooden touch to it.

"Visualised music"

HanafiH · Post by **HanafiH** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:48 pm

No sorry, you'll have to go louder than -70db before I can hear it.

Hey honey, I'd just bet you'ld like sum of my awesome daw.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:51 pm

OH I SEE YOU PREFER WARM FAT SOUNDS WITH WIDE OPEN SPACE. YOU ALSO LIKE IT TO "CRACK" RIGHT, AND HAVE A WOODEN TOUCH TO IT.

"VISUALISED MUSIC"

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:00 am

I did a quick summing test between my two posts, and...

I think there's a dithering bug around -194dB, and some truncation problems.

this is the inversed sum file of the two posts

Bad Boys Ravage Only Young Girls But Violet Gives Willingly

SAMPLITUDE RULES (DAW Summing)