General Question: Do some Hosts sound different from others, overall?

[perfumer]

but these usually have a mundane explanation, which is that there use different pan laws.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_law

If you correct for this, 99% of the time the audible differences disappear.

Some hosts have no way to do that, looking at you Bitwig and Renoise.

And it's also due to how precise the maths they use is. OK, they all use precise maths, but in some it's even more precise. Check out sascha from u-he's posts about Magix. If he says so, then it must be true. A few months ago, airwindows released a volume slider plugin that - Chris says - is far more precise than those in your DAW. In other words, really small, minute differences here and there sum up to a slightly different result, which sometimes is perceptible. But this is irrelevant to most people - music makers and listeners.

[xbitz]

Another thing is that Cubase sounds really good. And what I mean by that is that what you put into Cubase is what you get out. It’s not colored like other systems. I can tell straight away when somebody brings in a Logic track — I know exactly what it was recorded on. Part of why I like Cubase is that I don’t sound like everybody else. I mean we never use library sounds. You don’t really want to hear a sound you have in your 160-million-dollar movie in somebody else’s movie in the theater next door so everything we use is made from scratch. And so it’s very important to me that the quality of the software ensures that what ever work I put into it, it isn’t going to get colored. We already had this with the early digital recording where you can listen to a recording and you literally can put a time stamp onto it. And I think this will also happen with other DAWs. So you don’t really want to be able to identify the sound and that’s why the DAW has to be as transparent as possible so that it becomes timeless.

- Hans Zimmer on Inception and His DAW of Choice https://www.steinberg.net/en/community/ ... immer.html

your turn

[chk071]

Yeah, that's one of things i always mention, when stuff like this comes up.

[kvnes]

ha ha! Its an obsession!

[reggie1979]

I like to spend my time obsessing over daw sound differences. It's a wonderful detractor from actually using the damn things

[vurt]

my host sounds better than yours.

it's all about the user

[ghettosynth]

Another thing is that Cubase sounds really good. And what I mean by that is that what you put into Cubase is what you get out. It’s not colored like other systems. I can tell straight away when somebody brings in a Logic track — I know exactly what it was recorded on. Part of why I like Cubase is that I don’t sound like everybody else. I mean we never use library sounds. You don’t really want to hear a sound you have in your 160-million-dollar movie in somebody else’s movie in the theater next door so everything we use is made from scratch. And so it’s very important to me that the quality of the software ensures that what ever work I put into it, it isn’t going to get colored. We already had this with the early digital recording where you can listen to a recording and you literally can put a time stamp onto it. And I think this will also happen with other DAWs. So you don’t really want to be able to identify the sound and that’s why the DAW has to be as transparent as possible so that it becomes timeless.

- Hans Zimmer on Inception and His DAW of Choice https://www.steinberg.net/en/community/ ... immer.html

your turn

Not science, your turn.

[kvnes]

I like to spend my time obsessing over daw sound differences. It's a wonderful detractor from actually using the damn things

That's not my issue, exactly. I might know what you mean, though. The software is always quirky and I don't imagine there is instruction in the help manual, because whatever I am trying to do must be pretty obscure or something. But then I check the help topics and there it is, just what I needed. I need one place in the software to record a part or program a part, and another place to lay it all out. They all can pretty much do that, but its a task to figure out how to set the system up to make it enjoyable instead of frustrating.

I can't deal with just a timeline, I need a place to sketch the parts out and a timeline to arrange it. Doing both on the timeline is much harder for me, but every host I use has some way to do what I need.

[reggie1979]

It was totally in jest dude. Not meant as a personal insult or anything of the kind. It's just that this debate is older than my grandmother and it's best just to pick one that suits your needs (which is daunting enough) w/o worrying about sound quality.

[jonljacobi]

Thanks for discussing the question. I think I really am affected by how nice a GUI is...

Exactly. The same phenomenon that salespeople use to con people on everything from phones to cars.

[kvnes]

It was totally in jest dude. Not meant as a personal insult or anything of the kind. It's just that this debate is older than my grandmother and it's best just to pick one that suits your needs (which is daunting enough) w/o worrying about sound quality.

Oh yeah, I know. I thought it was funny and I tend to agree that comb filtering is way bigger than any small changes from super expensive equipment. I was agreeing with the post (I forgot to quote it) where he mentioned how all the time spent working on the little details of some sound quality that I can't quite identify eats up the time enjoying making something on the DAWs, which typically do really need to be personalized, setting wise, over time. I think they should all ship with the most minimal initial screen set up and show the customers how to add what they need one at a time. But having two or three DAW's is useful, I think. Checking out software is different from making music, though, and really is no fun after a while.

[Bombadil]

As with guitars, tone is all in the hands.

[Forgotten]

It depends how much aliasing there is...

[machinesworking]

Another thing is that Cubase sounds really good. And what I mean by that is that what you put into Cubase is what you get out. It’s not colored like other systems. I can tell straight away when somebody brings in a Logic track — I know exactly what it was recorded on. Part of why I like Cubase is that I don’t sound like everybody else. I mean we never use library sounds. You don’t really want to hear a sound you have in your 160-million-dollar movie in somebody else’s movie in the theater next door so everything we use is made from scratch. And so it’s very important to me that the quality of the software ensures that what ever work I put into it, it isn’t going to get colored. We already had this with the early digital recording where you can listen to a recording and you literally can put a time stamp onto it. And I think this will also happen with other DAWs. So you don’t really want to be able to identify the sound and that’s why the DAW has to be as transparent as possible so that it becomes timeless.

- Hans Zimmer on Inception and His DAW of Choice https://www.steinberg.net/en/community/ ... immer.html

your turn

Successful composer =/= engineer. His logic is flawed, it's that simple really.

Now just for fun, in the nuts and bolts of using a DAW, they do not all sound the same if you're using their built in time and pitch functions, their embedded plug ins etc. etc.

The idea that he thinks Logic songs are going to sound like 80's digital recordings because magic Cubase fairy dust, is complete bollocks though.

[chk071]

Think i'll have nightmares about aliasing in the near future.