You're comparing a sampler to an audiotrack which is not the same thing and not what we're discussing here. But in this case you're actually right.There is a difference.deep'n'dark wrote:I'm not gonna take this convesation further, i could be wrong too - happy now?
honestly why do people debate the sound quality of a host?
-
- KVRAF
- 9600 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
-
- KVRian
- 1448 posts since 8 Feb, 2006
Ok i see, so what is that you are talking then.jupiter8 wrote:You're comparing a sampler to an audiotrack which is not the same thing and not what we're discussing here. But in this case you're actually right.There is a difference.deep'n'dark wrote:I'm not gonna take this convesation further, i could be wrong too - happy now?
-
- KVRAF
- 9600 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
We're discussing importing an audiofile into a program that actually has the possibilty to playback an audiotrack (no a sampler still does'nt count). Maybe you've seen them mentioned on this very page. You know like Cubase,Live,Logic,Protools,Tunafish,FLStudio,etc ?deep'n'dark wrote:Ok i see, so what is that you are talking then.jupiter8 wrote:You're comparing a sampler to an audiotrack which is not the same thing and not what we're discussing here. But in this case you're actually right.There is a difference.deep'n'dark wrote:I'm not gonna take this convesation further, i could be wrong too - happy now?
A sampler has processing (interpolation stuff) on by default so it is still not the same thing as straight audio playback from a program that was designed to playback audiofiles.
-
- KVRian
- 1448 posts since 8 Feb, 2006
so in reason you can't get audio played without sampler at all - what i think is that some sounds played with other hosts doesn't sound as full with reason samplers but with version 4 it sounds fuller. Maybe i'm wrong but somehow it seems so. I believe anyhow that there's no differences when we talk about playing back sounds with different audio hosts.jupiter8 wrote:We're discussing importing an audiofile into a program that actually has the possibilty to playback an audiotrack (no a sampler still does'nt count). Maybe you've seen them mentioned on this very page. You know like Cubase,Live,Logic,Protools,Tunafish,FLStudio,etc ?deep'n'dark wrote:Ok i see, so what is that you are talking then.jupiter8 wrote:You're comparing a sampler to an audiotrack which is not the same thing and not what we're discussing here. But in this case you're actually right.There is a difference.deep'n'dark wrote:I'm not gonna take this convesation further, i could be wrong too - happy now?
A sampler has processing (interpolation stuff) on by default so it is still not the same thing as straight audio playback from a program that was designed to playback audiofiles.
-
- KVRAF
- 10171 posts since 2 Jan, 2005 from somewhere in the woods
nuffink wrote:impressed by the tuning here...call it compression!deep'n'dark wrote:what i tested was this: loaded in same audio and composed the same thing with both apps without any twaeks or plugins and i checked that there was no filters etc affecting the sound.nuffink wrote:That was a nulling test was it?deep'n'dark wrote:nuffink wrote:It's nothing to do with word against word, we've all made the tests. I've been involved in at least four threads which have ended in nulling tests on kvr. Without exception the've shown no differences above any conceivable noise floor.deep'n'dark wrote: word against word - nothing else - like i said i've made tests and that's only reason why i believe what i believe.
If you've made such tests and proven otherwise, paste the results.
i already did on page 6 or 7.
Meffy would say tuna press, i guess... .
...and?
"It dreamed itself along"
-
- KVRist
- 147 posts since 8 Jun, 2004
You cannot compare the sound of a sampler against a waveplayer. Here is why.
That is a copy of the aliasing image (taken from http://www.discodsp.com/highlife/aliasing/ ) of Reasons NNXT sampler, notice the amount of ghost notes that are produced that color the sound.
Cubase, Protools, etc all play or attempt to play back wave files with the minimum of coloration. There are very few samplers that do not produce aliasing that color the sound.
The expression engine used in Cakewalks synths/samplers (and equally transparent samplers like vsampler) are as close as you are going to get.
Im not saying aliasing is not something you might want, perhaps it adds a warmth to the sound, but ultimately saying reason plays back sounds at a better quality is complete BS, since if it does then it does so because it is significantly changing that sound. Something someone in Cubase /ProTools/ Logic/ Sonar does not want.
That is a copy of the aliasing image (taken from http://www.discodsp.com/highlife/aliasing/ ) of Reasons NNXT sampler, notice the amount of ghost notes that are produced that color the sound.
Cubase, Protools, etc all play or attempt to play back wave files with the minimum of coloration. There are very few samplers that do not produce aliasing that color the sound.
The expression engine used in Cakewalks synths/samplers (and equally transparent samplers like vsampler) are as close as you are going to get.
Im not saying aliasing is not something you might want, perhaps it adds a warmth to the sound, but ultimately saying reason plays back sounds at a better quality is complete BS, since if it does then it does so because it is significantly changing that sound. Something someone in Cubase /ProTools/ Logic/ Sonar does not want.
Stuart
-
- KVRAF
- 5117 posts since 5 May, 2005 from Stockholm, Sweden
..pass it on...mellotronaut wrote:nuffink wrote:impressed by the tuning here...call it compression!deep'n'dark wrote:what i tested was this: loaded in same audio and composed the same thing with both apps without any twaeks or plugins and i checked that there was no filters etc affecting the sound.nuffink wrote:That was a nulling test was it?deep'n'dark wrote:nuffink wrote: It's nothing to do with word against word, we've all made the tests. I've been involved in at least four threads which have ended in nulling tests on kvr. Without exception the've shown no differences above any conceivable noise floor.
If you've made such tests and proven otherwise, paste the results.
i already did on page 6 or 7.
Meffy would say tuna press, i guess... .
...and?
-
- KVRAF
- 2696 posts since 3 Aug, 2003 from Narnia
Now you too can compare the sound of eleven different DAWs...
Just go HERE and download HostEm VST.
Happy hosting
Just go HERE and download HostEm VST.
Happy hosting
Last edited by Andywanders on Mon Jul 30, 2007 2:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Skunk Mod
- 21249 posts since 10 Jun, 2004 from Pony Pasture
Pretty impressive. It'd work better if you were to license my Transparency Preserver code, but that would throw a whole new can of worms into the ring. Anyway, what if I prefer the sound of DAWs Butler to all those other DAWs?
-
- KVRist
- 440 posts since 11 Jul, 2003
Just out of curiosity: Does a sampler interpolate even if you play the sample as is, at its root note?jupiter8 wrote:We're discussing importing an audiofile into a program that actually has the possibilty to playback an audiotrack (no a sampler still does'nt count). Maybe you've seen them mentioned on this very page. You know like Cubase,Live,Logic,Protools,Tunafish,FLStudio,etc ?deep'n'dark wrote:Ok i see, so what is that you are talking then.jupiter8 wrote:You're comparing a sampler to an audiotrack which is not the same thing and not what we're discussing here. But in this case you're actually right.There is a difference.deep'n'dark wrote:I'm not gonna take this convesation further, i could be wrong too - happy now?
A sampler has processing (interpolation stuff) on by default so it is still not the same thing as straight audio playback from a program that was designed to playback audiofiles.
I was under the impression that interpolation was only taking place when the sample had to be pitched up or down from the root frequency. When I look at the pictures from the aliasing tests, none of the samplers tested aliases when the sample is played back at its root note(15khz in this case).
Could anyone shed some light on this?
-
- KVRAF
- 6323 posts since 30 Dec, 2004 from London uk
I love threads like this. Nothing like people getting hot under the collar to make me smile. I think the null tests should be tried under 64 bit Vista for good measure 
Runs for cover and puts flame retardant clothes on.
Runs for cover and puts flame retardant clothes on.
-
- KVRAF
- 3038 posts since 12 Mar, 2002 from Central NY
If that's what real burly lumberjack type men use then whatMutant wrote:Is for fairies !UltraJv wrote:64 bit Vista
Real men use 64 bit XP PRO !
(and it sounds much better too)
do tree hugging birkenstock wearing granola eating unwashed
hippes use? Gotta be Linux!
Cheers.....CL
the secrets to old age: Faster horses, Richer Women, Bigger CPU's
https://soundcloud.com/cristofe-chabot/sets/main
https://soundcloud.com/cristofe-chabot/sets/main
-
- KVRist
- 204 posts since 7 Jun, 2001
a bit late but still, my personal list why people like to think that daws have a sound:
- because nobody likes how the whole voodoo and "be a golden ear to hear the subtle differences"-business is taken away from them. that little touch of black magic in our profession is something many people want to preserve at all costs. also, today an engineers job is much simpler than it used to be. they already took away those big mixing desks from us. remember how people came into the studio and first thing they said was "and you KNOW what ALL THESE BUTTONS do???" and you could reply with a fake-modest "well, uh, yeah, no big deal huh". no more. and now all daws are supposed to sound the same? booh!
- because theres a million things that you can do wrong when doing a nulltest, resulting in countless stories of nulltests that didnt cancel out perfectly. yet, if someone made the nulltest correctly and the results canceled out, stories about tests in the same daw and same version where it didnt cancel are just stories of people who werent able to make a proper test.
- because many many people dont understand how pan law works and what it does
- because theres still thousands of engineers (including very good ones) that choose to ignore even the most basic psychoacoustics and make statements like "im not fooled by subtle volume differences, i can hear that file A sounds a bit more spacey than file B" without laughing :-)
- because its VERY cool to say "oh no, digital is not digital, its not that simple my friend" (see also point 1 about the black magic and voodoo aspect)
- because there are people (especially long time pros) that were traumatized long ago when some apps still had stoneage engines, i.e. older protools with 24bit linear resolution and no headroom on the mix bus.
- because those same people bought expensive equipment back then to make up for these shortcomings. no way will they now admit to themselves that they invested such insane amounts of money just to fix a temporary software design problem. so, hosts must have a sound. and since theyre pros, everyone who comes to their studio and hears them rant believes them, cause, you know, theyre the pros are they not? they must know!
- because many people arent able to split the problem into single pieces. they make no difference whether the sound difference might come from the converters, some plugins they used or whatnot. none of it having anything to do with how a daws summing sounds.
- urban legends have a tendency to be immortal.
im sure theres more :-)
- because nobody likes how the whole voodoo and "be a golden ear to hear the subtle differences"-business is taken away from them. that little touch of black magic in our profession is something many people want to preserve at all costs. also, today an engineers job is much simpler than it used to be. they already took away those big mixing desks from us. remember how people came into the studio and first thing they said was "and you KNOW what ALL THESE BUTTONS do???" and you could reply with a fake-modest "well, uh, yeah, no big deal huh". no more. and now all daws are supposed to sound the same? booh!
- because theres a million things that you can do wrong when doing a nulltest, resulting in countless stories of nulltests that didnt cancel out perfectly. yet, if someone made the nulltest correctly and the results canceled out, stories about tests in the same daw and same version where it didnt cancel are just stories of people who werent able to make a proper test.
- because many many people dont understand how pan law works and what it does
- because theres still thousands of engineers (including very good ones) that choose to ignore even the most basic psychoacoustics and make statements like "im not fooled by subtle volume differences, i can hear that file A sounds a bit more spacey than file B" without laughing :-)
- because its VERY cool to say "oh no, digital is not digital, its not that simple my friend" (see also point 1 about the black magic and voodoo aspect)
- because there are people (especially long time pros) that were traumatized long ago when some apps still had stoneage engines, i.e. older protools with 24bit linear resolution and no headroom on the mix bus.
- because those same people bought expensive equipment back then to make up for these shortcomings. no way will they now admit to themselves that they invested such insane amounts of money just to fix a temporary software design problem. so, hosts must have a sound. and since theyre pros, everyone who comes to their studio and hears them rant believes them, cause, you know, theyre the pros are they not? they must know!
- because many people arent able to split the problem into single pieces. they make no difference whether the sound difference might come from the converters, some plugins they used or whatnot. none of it having anything to do with how a daws summing sounds.
- urban legends have a tendency to be immortal.
im sure theres more :-)