The difference of audio engines
-
- KVRAF
- 2327 posts since 13 Apr, 2004 from Vancouver, Canada
Oh no! The flood-gates have opened... Soon to spew forth with Davor-esq rhetoric... Run for the hills!
-
- KVRAF
- 25035 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
camsr wrote:wtf are you talking about?! quit scaring the newbies!
you're aren't long enough here to realize what he means - I however do and Advaya is right!
-
- KVRAF
- 3299 posts since 7 May, 2004 from Athens, Greece
That's what I said in the "SAMPLITUDE RULES" thread:
A few of us seem to agree with this point of view. Any pointer to an experiment showing that the theory is wrong will be much appreciated.I know that there is not a finit number of experiments that could prove a theory. We have enough experiments which support the theory that there is not a DAW sound (taking into account limits of human hearing). Now all it takes to prove that a theory is wrong is just one experiment showing something wich does not agree with what this theory predicts. We 're still expecting this experiment ... (in fact I don't give a shit)
If I go insane, please don't put your wires in my brain
-
- KVRist
- 288 posts since 3 Mar, 2004 from Denmark
Summing algo's can be vastly different, and the fact is that summing signal does not usually just output the two signal: there is also some level of distortion in the signal generated by the process. Then there's stuff like dither to take into consideration.
Testing with 1 audio file is not enough - should really mix a few tracks all at unity gain - then output and subtract one from the other. Then you'll know if there's a difference.
For me the problem with EXT is getting decent level with no trim gain and 127 linear steps on the mixer fader.
peat.
Testing with 1 audio file is not enough - should really mix a few tracks all at unity gain - then output and subtract one from the other. Then you'll know if there's a difference.
For me the problem with EXT is getting decent level with no trim gain and 127 linear steps on the mixer fader.
peat.
-
- KVRAF
- 1811 posts since 18 Jan, 2005 from Lost in the blinding whiteness of the tundra
A couple of decibels gain on the output?digitalmessiah wrote:btw, of all the hosts that i've used/tried, Orion Plat sounds very punchy and loud. i don't know what Rich did to that thing but it sounds bloody loud.
It's a rave, Lewis!
-
- KVRAF
- 4738 posts since 20 Feb, 2004 from Gothenburg, Sweden
We tested with 16 unique tracks, no audible differences between the hosts we've tested so far.
edit: you can read about these tests in the other thread, the one I posted a link to earlier in this one.
In eXT, if you need better resolution, you can always use a gain plug. But the 7bit levels limitation does not change the audio quality, only which levels you can set.
Dithering is usually not part of the audio engine but a seperate feature, used when converting the audio to a lower bit depth.
edit: you can read about these tests in the other thread, the one I posted a link to earlier in this one.
In eXT, if you need better resolution, you can always use a gain plug. But the 7bit levels limitation does not change the audio quality, only which levels you can set.
Dithering is usually not part of the audio engine but a seperate feature, used when converting the audio to a lower bit depth.
Stefan H Singer
https://dropshotaudio.com/
https://dropshotaudio.com/
-
- KVRAF
- 1718 posts since 3 Sep, 2003
Man oh man.
How bizarre that buzz words and graphical design became bread and butter of the audio industry.
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE IMPACT OF PSYCHOACOUTSICS.
Just like you can not look at THIS word without reading it, your brain forms an impression of a sound using all available data, before you are even aware of hearing it.
So, what you hear is not the actuall physical phenomenon of sound, but a mental represantation of it. There is even a 30 ms delay between the sound hitting your ear and you becomming aware of it.
Yes. We do not live in "real time". Reading can have up to a 300 ms delay between impulse and awareness. Deal with that for a second.
So, you can even hear specific differences.. more highs, deeper lows or whatever, that are not there, but are just interpretations your brain does for you based on some other information it has. Like a flashy GUI.
If you've read the free chapter of the mixer man diary you know about the knobs they gave to the executive so he thought he had control over the mix, though they didn't do jack...but he heared the difference.
How bizarre that buzz words and graphical design became bread and butter of the audio industry.
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE IMPACT OF PSYCHOACOUTSICS.
Just like you can not look at THIS word without reading it, your brain forms an impression of a sound using all available data, before you are even aware of hearing it.
So, what you hear is not the actuall physical phenomenon of sound, but a mental represantation of it. There is even a 30 ms delay between the sound hitting your ear and you becomming aware of it.
Yes. We do not live in "real time". Reading can have up to a 300 ms delay between impulse and awareness. Deal with that for a second.
So, you can even hear specific differences.. more highs, deeper lows or whatever, that are not there, but are just interpretations your brain does for you based on some other information it has. Like a flashy GUI.
If you've read the free chapter of the mixer man diary you know about the knobs they gave to the executive so he thought he had control over the mix, though they didn't do jack...but he heared the difference.
-
- KVRer
- 5 posts since 15 Jan, 2006
Good post, Hardbuns. People with no knowledge of the terms "ABX", "double blind testing", "auditory memory" and "placebo effect" have no business doing comparative tests. I just got a collection of back issues of "The Audio Critic" from the 90's, and though the reviews are out of date, the science is still sound and relevant. And the kind of hooha that exists in audiophilia also does (to a lesser degree) in pro audio.
-
- KVRian
- 568 posts since 17 Dec, 2003 from Under the Overtones
... so the big question is...
will i do greater music in hosts that makes me think it sounds better ( due to color, buttons, windows, mouse action, shortcuts ... )
or should i pick an uggly grey host (amiga anyone) to push my music composition harder ??? go figure...
will i do greater music in hosts that makes me think it sounds better ( due to color, buttons, windows, mouse action, shortcuts ... )
or should i pick an uggly grey host (amiga anyone) to push my music composition harder ??? go figure...
-
- KVRAF
- 4867 posts since 18 Dec, 2000
how can so many people agree that many filters are coded differently in synths, but the sound engine in all hosts is exactly the same.
I just don't get it.
dw
I just don't get it.
dw
-
- KVRAF
- 10597 posts since 13 Jun, 2004 from Alberto Balsam
That's like asking how we believe that house cat breeds are all roughly the same size when dog breeds differ so much in size. Because we've all seen and used cats.dusted william wrote:how can so many people agree that many filters are coded differently in synths, but the sound engine in all hosts is exactly the same.
I just don't get it.
dw
-
- KVRAF
- 3617 posts since 26 Sep, 2003 from Bradford - The Armpit of Britain
-
- KVRAF
- 10597 posts since 13 Jun, 2004 from Alberto Balsam
-
- KVRAF
- 3617 posts since 26 Sep, 2003 from Bradford - The Armpit of Britain
I have an image in my head now of a tipsy chase, post-prom, in full regalia, tuxedo & all (with puke stains down the lapels & lipstick on the collar) - waving his waliking cane wildly in the air & shouting an inebriated 'tally-ho' as he's makes his way through the snow on his pussy-cat drawn sled/carriage.
I need another drink
I need another drink