The difference of audio engines

[anselmoso]

Hi,

I've been testing almost any sequencer out there and own licenses for EnergyXT, Tracktion 2, Cubase SE and Cubase SL 3.

And for some reason I never got as good sounding results in a finite time period out of Tracktion, Ext or Cubase SE as out of Cubase SL 3 - with the same audio- / midi-tracks and using the same effects plugins (freeware). Although I have no problems using Tracktion or Ext - the results I get after a little mixing time always kind of sound better when using the latest Cubase version. And as far as I can remember - my best sounding mixes and best overall results always where Cubase projects....

Can any of you guys confirm that this experience could be influenced by the different audio-engines of these sequencers?

[arke]

Nope, thats not it, its something else.

The audio engine in different sequencers isn't really dependent on the Sequencer itself. All it does is add 32-bit floating point numbers, which the processor itself does. So even if there were a difference, it would relate to the processor. However, since processors today all implement the same IEEE floating point math standard, there really is no difference between the different audio engines.

However, maybe it has something to do with the final equalization or compression you apply that is part of the sequencer itself. Or maybe it just makes you make better music in the first place, who knows?

[anselmoso]

However, since processors today all implement the same IEEE floating point math standard, there really is no difference between the different audio engines.

So you say, although Steinberg has many years of experience with sequencers - the relatively "fresh" EnergyXT audio-engine for example sounds just as good as a Cubase SL/SX audio-engine?

[The Chase]

However, since processors today all implement the same IEEE floating point math standard, there really is no difference between the different audio engines.

So you say, although Steinberg has many years of experience with sequencers - the relatively "fresh" EnergyXT audio-engine for example sounds just as good as a Cubase SL/SX audio-engine?

as long as it is 32 bit yes.

[Debutante]

... the results I get after a little mixing...

There's your answer most likely. If you were comparing the same MIDI, instrument, sequence...combination without altering it at all, you should get the same sound. If you're adding MIXING to it and then saying it sounds different, then obviously there's some kind of different treatment. If you use exactly the same settings FOR EVERYTHING between sequencers, effects included, then you should be getting the same sound, provided you are using the exact same plugins throughout.

[camsr]

Meters in different hosts have different response curves. A meter in FL might have a logarhithmic response, while a meter in Cubase might have an exponential response. Different "feels" can make things seem better, because with some interfaces people can just, fit, into their controls. The different feel can have a final effect over the balance of the mix.

[anselmoso]

well then it seems as if i get along best with the Cubase way of working....although i dislike the dongle-protection and the Steinberg policy......it seems as if for some reason I just work "better" with Cubase.....

thanks for your answers

[kara]

here we go again ................

[Sepheritoh]

This total bull-s.

Offcourse they all sound different. How can it be expected that sound that enter one computer program and being mangles in uncertain ways would come out the same as sound that enters another program. It is like expecting Jimmy Hendrix to sound the same as Eric Clapton when they play Little Wing. It is just not possible to sound the same. There are too many things that are different. For one, the colour of Sonor's splash screen is dominantly green. Cubase's splash screen is dominantly white / grey. It is not the same. Even the background colours are different. Then there is the way they insert effects. The one program has an effects rack. The other not. They can not sound the same unless they work the same. I can mention many other differences, e.g. the humidity in the factories where the manuls are printed. All these things will make them sound different.....







or maby not

[stefancrs]

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=75112

[Hovmod]

Don't mix things. You're adding variables to the equation.
Take a reference wav file, load it in each host, export as wav without making any changes or adjustments. Use an audio editor to verify that levels are the same. Put in winamp, click shuffle. See if you can tell them apart.

[jens]

well then it seems as if i get along best with the Cubase way of working....although i dislike the dongle-protection and the Steinberg policy......it seems as if for some reason I just work "better" with Cubase.....

did you experiment with different panning laws?

[jupiter8]

Although i find it a bit funny that he achieves better result in 2 different flavours of Cubase.
Are'nt the workflow pretty much the same?
I only have experience with SX but i find it hard to believe that there is so much diffrence between SE and SL.

[fandango]

"It's all to do with the colours maaaaaaan..."

[nuffink]

For the truth, we need to wait for the followers of Vest Man...



...to enter the thread.