The sound remains the same?

[DWS]

"Tracktion 2 has a new high-definition 64-bit mixing option to alleviate this concern."

Does this mean it will actually sound better or that it will sound the same as T1 but everybody that is worried about sound quality won't have to worry any more?

This is a topic that is raised over and over and if anyone questions the sound quality they seem to get ripped to shreds but yet Mackie is advertising this as a 'feature'.

Scott

[valley]

theoretically - a higher bit depth summing engine allows you to work with a greater nyumber of tracks before digital noise starts to build up.

Every time you add an extra bit, you double the maximum number that can be stored.

So to accurately add two 16bit numbers together you need a 17bit number, and so on.

If you are not using more than 24 tracks, a 32 bit summing engine is unlikely to produce truly discernible levels of noise when rendered down to 16bits, but for track counts higher that 32, there are advantages.

[disclaimer]
The math behind how noise accumulates on IEEE floating point numbers is way beyond me this early in the day, and it's hard to explain this stuff accurately withotu getting lost in minutia[/disclaimer]

[DWS]

If you are not using more than 24 tracks, a 32 bit summing engine is unlikely to produce truly discernible levels of noise when rendered down to 16bits, but for track counts higher that 32, there are advantages.

Ok, thanks for the reply. I just thought that 'alleviate this concern' was a really strange way of putting that. In fact the more I read the spiel on this particular feature, the stranger it sounds. Like this phrase:

"and a place where software can potentially suffer versus a traditional hardware mixer."

'Suffer' is an odd choice. If it's just a question of less distortion why not say so? How about "a place where software can potentially add distortion versus a traditional hardware mixer."

And finally does 'software' include 'T1'? It seems like that what they are implying.

It's like they are saying 'hey, this is really smoke and mirrors but to alleviate any concerns, our new version supports this higher resolution'.

[headquest]

I thought that the add was refering to a general concern among pro sound engineers about the hardware/software issue.

So I don't think they are/were implying a specific concern about sound quality in Tracktion as opposed to any other sequencing/audio software.

The move towards 64-bit summing is a general one at present in the sequencer updates coming out, and was prompted I believe by generic improvements in computer processing power.

So Cubase SX3 went 64-bit, T2 has announced it, and I believe I saw here at KVR that Cakewalk are beta-testing a 64-bit version of Sonar PE4.

The aim of all these is, I guess, to finally convince skeptical hardware diehards that software can truly deliver the goods.

[voidar]

This is really about dynamics, headroom and depth, and most 32-bit summing busses seem to lack this compared to the high-end mixing consoles of the old world.
It will be intersting to hear what they have come up with ad bold specs won't necessarily put you there. A mathematical correct summing-engine won't necessarily sound the best. Some people like them to be warm, big and fat-sounding.

[Improv]

If you are not using more than 24 tracks, a 32 bit summing engine is unlikely to produce truly discernible levels of noise when rendered down to 16bits, but for track counts higher that 32, there are advantages.

Ok, thanks for the reply. I just thought that 'alleviate this concern' was a really strange way of putting that. In fact the more I read the spiel on this particular feature, the stranger it sounds. Like this phrase:

"and a place where software can potentially suffer versus a traditional hardware mixer."

'Suffer' is an odd choice. If it's just a question of less distortion why not say so? How about "a place where software can potentially add distortion versus a traditional hardware mixer."

And finally does 'software' include 'T1'? It seems like that what they are implying.

It's like they are saying 'hey, this is really smoke and mirrors but to alleviate any concerns, our new version supports this higher resolution'.

Hey, marketing guys, what ya gonna do with them!

[IIRs]

Some people like them to be warm, big and fat-sounding.

Yeah, some + operations are really cold and digital sounding. I added 2 + 2 the other day with a digital +, and got a really flat brittle-sounding 4 with no depth and bad stereo imaging.

But when I used a good analogue + I got a really Phat warm sounding 4

[voidar]

Some people like them to be warm, big and fat-sounding.

Yeah, some + operations are really cold and digital sounding. I added 2 + 2 the other day with a digital +, and got a really flat brittle-sounding 4 with no depth and bad stereo imaging.

But when I used a good analogue + I got a really Phat warm sounding 4

The point is, in audio terms the answer 4 might not sound as good as 3. So, 2 + 2 should really be 3 .
Anyway, Tracktions mixer is probably mathematically correct, but 64 bit mixing engines are not fiction at all.

[haydxn]

Some people like them to be warm, big and fat-sounding.

Yeah, some + operations are really cold and digital sounding. I added 2 + 2 the other day with a digital +, and got a really flat brittle-sounding 4 with no depth and bad stereo imaging.

But when I used a good analogue + I got a really Phat warm sounding 4

perhaps then someone will make an 'analogue mixer' plugin, that you can put in a rack, and it will decide where to get the sums wrong to make it sound better?

[voidar]

Some people like them to be warm, big and fat-sounding.

Yeah, some + operations are really cold and digital sounding. I added 2 + 2 the other day with a digital +, and got a really flat brittle-sounding 4 with no depth and bad stereo imaging.

But when I used a good analogue + I got a really Phat warm sounding 4

perhaps then someone will make an 'analogue mixer' plugin, that you can put in a rack, and it will decide where to get the sums wrong to make it sound better?

Well, it's called modelling. Perhaps. Not that I relaly care as I do my mixing through externally, through DSP. That's one of the reasons I like Tracktion, the ease of routing your tracks directly out of the app.

[haydxn]