KVR Audio

dalor · Post by **dalor** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:43 am

hibidy wrote:
dalor wrote:
trimph1 wrote:
dalor wrote:Fish capitators? You nuts? You think I'm that stewpid? Of course I use qartz crystals taped onto my audio cables and screen to speed up the processor... n stuff.. yknow?
But you must use the fishie capacitors!! It will make you have the hitzzes!!!!
Dude, the qartz crystals are kool but I don't get as many hitzzees. I have to try the fish capsulators! No matter what price I have to get em!! Will they also make the bass go like boooumm bouummm n shit?
No, but they will give you incredible fish burps.

Sounds fishy to me

ZenPunkHippy · Post by **ZenPunkHippy** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:48 am

Pfft, just wait until you hear Bitwig Studio. The clarity, detail and air from Bitwig makes all other DAW's sound like bit crushers ... it really is that good!

braj · Post by **braj** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:50 am

I wonder how many musicians have tinnitus and really can't tell the difference even when there is one (raising my hand).

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:45 am

dalor wrote:
hibidy wrote:
dalor wrote:
trimph1 wrote:
dalor wrote:Fish capitators? You nuts? You think I'm that stewpid? Of course I use qartz crystals taped onto my audio cables and screen to speed up the processor... n stuff.. yknow?
But you must use the fishie capacitors!! It will make you have the hitzzes!!!!
Dude, the qartz crystals are kool but I don't get as many hitzzees. I have to try the fish capsulators! No matter what price I have to get em!! Will they also make the bass go like boooumm bouummm n shit?
No, but they will give you incredible fish burps.
Sounds fishy to me

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:46 am

ZenPunkHippy wrote:Pfft, just wait until you hear Bitwig Studio. The clarity, detail and air from Bitwig makes all other DAW's sound like bit crushers ... it really is that good!

Probably uses that new apple audio format

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:47 am

braj wrote:I wonder how many musicians have tinnitus and really can't tell the difference even when there is one (raising my hand).

I admit, at 47 the ringing is constant. I do check messages on my answering machine from time to time (yes, I still have a real phone!

)

havran · Post by **havran** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:56 am

I'm still waiting for a host that doesn't get between me and the sound in my mind.

liquidsound · Post by **liquidsound** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:13 am

S1 is a freaking great Daw (to me) and it sound terrific (to me) and has an amazing workflow (to me) and it sound the best (to him)
So what's the problem boys?
Hum... I see.....

lightsfadelow · Post by **lightsfadelow** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:30 am

The problem is that if it sounds any different than any othe DAW when doing the same summing calculations, it's doing something wrong. A DAW can't 'sound great' it can only sound accurate.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:34 am

havran wrote:I'm still waiting for a host that doesn't get between me and the sound in my mind.

(tips hat) I've gone through 1000's of dollars thinking the same thing

tony tony chopper · Post by **tony tony chopper** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:55 am

wow that's bad marketing to write such a thing on an official page

it pretty much says:
-it sounds better but we don't know why because we don't know what we're doing
-it sounds subjectively better, thus objectively different from how it should sound, but you can't disable it
-we're keeping the 64bit/summing engine myth alive

but it sounds more like the blogger doesn't know what he's saying & I'd be the Studio one programmers I'd be pissed reading that.

chokehold · Post by **chokehold** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:26 am

after hearing my mixes in Studio One, everything else just sounds weak and wrong

I'm having a problem with this sentence.
How can you "hear your mixes in another host"?

Is there a Software that converts between Cubase and Studio One format?
Actually, there is a program called "Pro Convert" that does something similar, but not for Studio One.

And still, if there were a program which converted Cubase projects to Studio One projects ... maybe it's the program's conversion algorithm that makes it sound better in Studio One?
I bet the algorithm that converts Pro Tools to Reaper is the best of them all!

Nah, seriously, to "hear your mixes" in another host, there are just 2 things you could do:
1) render the processed stems and import them into Studio One or
2) render the unprocessed single tracks and import them into Studio One.

In case #1 the mixing would've been done in the first host, and at the offline rendering stage the raised sample interpolation might have added some definition to the stems.

In case #2 one would have to mix everything again, which would result in a new mix.

So #1 sounds better because the first host calculated it better, and #2 sounds better because you did a new mix.
Neither way proves that Studio One "just sounds better".

In fact, the only thing I can think of that could really make Studio One sound SLIGHTLY better when playing back audio clips is that maybe it uses a higher "live" sample interpolation than other hosts.
But other hosts have switchable sample interpolation values and could be optimized in the blink of an eye to do the same.

But in the end, Studio One's possibly higher sample interpolation would still have no effect on the result, as it -just as the other hosts- could only raise the interpolation to the same level that other hosts have as well during offline rendering.

So it might have better interpolation when playing back the mix, but it won't sound better if it's rendered.

And just as someone before me wrote: if it DOES sound different than other hosts, it's doing something wrong.

bebop · Post by **bebop** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:38 am

And just as someone before me wrote: if it DOES sound different than other hosts, it's doing something wrong.

That's true, but it's not even the point, and there's more to it, now we know the ear itself modulates the sound sensitivity : if you put aside technical measurements that cannot tell by themselves what sounds better from worse, your listening ability, the way it's hard coded in your brain AND NOW IN THE EAR ITSELF, is roughly an inappropriate tool to tell what sounds how. End of the story. And you can bet you won't listen to the mixing process at the beginning and at the end of the mixing session (as we all know practically), but now there's a reasonable proof that it's perfectly true.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:43 am

Sonar, cubase, and live have all made blurbs in the past that their host sound better (oooo sorry, live said "better fidelity"......don't want to get chastised for that again

)

I gave up caring long ago. These threads are fun while they remain active.

Image-Line · Post by **Image-Line** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:32 am

tony tony chopper wrote:wow that's bad marketing to write such a thing on an official page

...

& I'd be the Studio one programmers I'd be pissed reading that.

I imagined having to face up to you if I had written something like that (I feel their pain)

Fortunately I wasn't tempted as I had already written this...

http://www.image-line.com/support/FLHel ... _audio.htm

Regards Scott

Studio One sounds better, thanks to... It just does.