KVR Audio

siriusbliss · Post by **siriusbliss** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:46 pm

Samplitude's history is in high-end audio and mixing.

MIDI was only really added in the past few revs.

The other Cubasers, and Cakewalkers, and Logics of the world came across from MIDI apps. to audio.

MIDI implementation in Samp. is fine for me. Audio quality is somehow 'cleaner' and 'airyer'. Lots of pros switching over.

ALL the VST's I've worked with or tried in Samplitude have worked just fine and weave into the production process seemelessly.

Ver. 8.3 is due soon.

Greg

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:01 am

or listen to this demo

in Cubase there seems to be some kind of extra processing when using VSt effects.... I can hear the reverb wobble at the first part.
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.wav

the dynamics in Samplitude stay constant and are just mixed in first part. Finally when you can only hear the tail of the reverb, it also sounds more structured....
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.WAV

there should be NO difference if 1+1=2. But there is a difference. You just have to test with heavy fx usage and not jsut mixing 2 wav files....

And thats why a complete mix in Samplitude sounds much more pro.... that is not an illusion, it is fact, even if some super intelligent developers here at KVR think it cannot be true.

Listen to this mix how clean it sounds and very "analog" compared to the inferior Cubase sound...
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... stered.wma

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:01 am

Another religious thread?

I don't care about your proof, I have my faith. I don't care what the developers of these thing say I TRUST MY EARS DAMMIT!

Can anyone recommend a good synth for trance?

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:08 am

nuffink wrote:Another religious thread?

I don't care about your proof, I have my faith. I don't care what the developers of these thing say I TRUST MY EARS DAMMIT!

Can anyone recommend a good synth for trance?

nrg-A seems a good one

Colonel Flashback · Post by **Colonel Flashback** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:36 am

rofl...

@hifiboom: listened to your clips - you've delivered compelling evidence that different sounds sound different...

siriusbliss · Post by **siriusbliss** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:59 am

it's called 'air'.

A better example would be classical or acoustic jazz. Not the electronic blurps and bleeps.

*****

Colonel Flashback · Post by **Colonel Flashback** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:05 am

You got me thinking, i've done an A/B myself now and i think i actually managed to capture Samplitudes air quite well.
Please check it out siriusbliss.
http://s65.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2OP0 ... EWCO71M2I2

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:30 am

popsych posts of Samplitude:
"It's sound is the best"
nufflink writes: "You're a fantasist mate. We see them all the time here. You won't do any test. You'll wriggle out of it or just disappear."
Did I miss something or are we still waiting for the test proof from popsych?
popsych backtracks:
"To make things clear i never claimed the reason it sounds good is the engine."
Did I miss something, or is the title of this thread "SAMPLITUDE RULES (DAW Summing)"?
I am really open to hearing these summing differences for myself, so if you can hear the difference, post some files and prove it once and for all. Please. The next time someone claims Reason sounds better than FLStudio, which has more air than Nuendo, which secretly compresses more than Cubase, we can just post the link to the unbiased test files and be done with it.
By the way, my dad can beat up your dad, AND my host is bigger than your host.

HanafiH · Post by **HanafiH** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:30 am

hifiboom wrote:or listen to this demo

in Cubase there seems to be some kind of extra processing when using VSt effects.... I can hear the reverb wobble at the first part.
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.wav

the dynamics in Samplitude stay constant and are just mixed in first part. Finally when you can only hear the tail of the reverb, it also sounds more structured....
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.WAV

Yep, that's the difference.

daGuru · Post by **daGuru** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:48 am

Here's the algo. I'd use:

eg: 32 trax downto stereo pair

Per sample slice:

Sort by amplitude

Sum in pairs (ch1 + ch2) / 2, etc

We now have half the amt of trax

Loop till all trax done

But then again, wot do I know? hehe

(GAW)

arke · Post by **arke** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:53 am

hifiboom wrote:or listen to this demo

in Cubase there seems to be some kind of extra processing when using VSt effects.... I can hear the reverb wobble at the first part.
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.wav

the dynamics in Samplitude stay constant and are just mixed in first part. Finally when you can only hear the tail of the reverb, it also sounds more structured....
http://home.arcor.de/rd50info_site/soun ... reverb.WAV

Erm. ?

Well first of all you're playing different notes ... you should have played the same.

Second, all I hear is that the reverb on the samplitude one has a slightly shorter tail. Wobbling at the beginning? I do not know what you're talking about.

HanafiH · Post by **HanafiH** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:02 am

nuffink wrote:Another religious thread?

I don't care about your proof, I have my faith. I don't care what the developers of these thing say I TRUST MY EARS DAMMIT!

Can anyone recommend a good synth for trance?

Uh huh. You appear to be saying: there isn't any difference because I say so, and even if there is, it doesn't matter and even if it does, it doesn't matter to me, so screw you.

Hmm. The great smell of hypocrisy.

Perhaps you and Corporal Acidcasualty could do a double act. Something like Pinky and The Brain. I'll leave it up to you to argue over the casting details. I have work to do.

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:11 am

You're missing the sarcasm in his post.
Still waiting, years now, for the simple well constructed test that proves the "DAW summing difference" theory. Two files- that's all it would take. I would think, if there were any truth to this theory at all, that just one of the rabid golden ears would have produced these files by now, that they would be eager to share this with all of us.

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:27 am

HanafiH wrote:
nuffink wrote:Another religious thread?

I don't care about your proof, I have my faith. I don't care what the developers of these thing say I TRUST MY EARS DAMMIT!

Can anyone recommend a good synth for trance?
Uh huh. You appear to be saying: there isn't any difference because I say so, and even if there is, it doesn't matter and even if it does, it doesn't matter to me, so screw you.

Hmm. The great smell of hypocrisy.

Perhaps you and Corporal Acidcasualty could do a double act. Something like Pinky and The Brain. I'll leave it up to you to argue over the casting details. I have work to do.

No. What I'm saying is that if there's a difference, prove it.
The burden of proof is yours. Until you can prove it, it's a faith. Nothing to do with hypocricy.

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:44 am

hifiboom: if you want to make comparisons, compare the exact same in data to see if the out data differs. you can't use different in data and THEN expect the out data to NOT differ