Every time I export an audiomixdown in cubase it sounds crap

[LBN]

As for firewire drives i believe they sound really warm but i think usb (especially 2) sounds more like tube and it gives me better stereo separation about 20-40%

True, but nothing can touch firewire for that phat analogue sound. It just has a natural saturation beyond 0db that you can't get with USB. Firewire is 20-40% phatter than SATA. I also keep all my applications on my external firewire drive so they're more phat too. I'm running a phat Firefox right now.

[davor]

Sound is more than zeroes and ones,

Everything you (or your John Vestman and Roger Nichols celebrities) said isn't caused in the digital realm - just as others pointed out eloquently allready. Burning a CD is an analog process.

What is there analogue about this:

"I suggest that artists can bring in their computer so that we avoid the degradation of "rendering" a 2 track mix internally in a hard disc system. The hard disc systems cause some quality loss due to the software's mix engine that blends all those tracks down into two." (John Vestman)
????????????????????????????????????????

Is rendering a multitrack mix into a stereo file within a DAW also an analogue process? As far as I know it isn't, but perhaps you know better.
Burning a CD is an analog process? Just like a cassette, huh?

[davor]

good answer - have you been away looking that up for the last 20 minutes ?

If you know the difference between a CD-rom, and a redbook cd, then almost everybody knows it, you can be sure of that.

[ericj23]

hello little troll boy

can i tickle you under your chin

ahhhhh

its a shame you don't purr - then more people might like you

[cimoc]

Do any other 'top professional' type mastering engineers agree with this vestman bloke, or is this his lone crusade? (I noticed he never stated others agreed with him - only that he had got a 'dialogue' going)
What is he selling?
are you Mr. Vestman in disguise davor? If not have you got the hots for Mr. Vestman?
Have you got some kind of pathological hatred of maths & numbers in general? (some say they are the building blocks of the universe - or the language that 'god' speaks etc. - Lot of theoretical stuff about 'music is maths' yada, yada,yada) does this offend you or scare you ina anyway?
Do you, davor, believe at all in the efficacy of wrapping ones head in tin foil in order to protect oneself from alien transmissions, or even as part of the esoteric art of mastering?
Do you, davor, live under a bridge by any chance, & if so do you charge the pixies & nixies & other wee folk a toll to let them cross?
&, lastly, does anyone here really give a f**k what you think? I know I don't, i'm bored so i'm feeding the trolls.

I'm not him, I just have the same experience as him, as do all the top name sound and mastering engineers. Now a question for you. Do you do any kind of sound engineering for living? If you do, I pity those who would ask for your services. Speaking about maths I would quote once again:

"Still the best piece of test gear is your ears" (Roger Nichols)

Shouldn't "him" be spelled with a capital H?

Boys, please read more carefully! You are arguing with one of the top experienced engineers here. Show respect!

[M'Snah]

"I suggest that artists can bring in their computer so that we avoid the degradation of "rendering" a 2 track mix internally in a hard disc system. The hard disc systems cause some quality loss due to the software's mix engine that blends all those tracks down into two." (John Vestman)

oh... I misread this all the time... Apparently "hard disc system" is Vestman's name for PC or DAW... It has nothing to do with the hard disk.

If I read this carefully: If I start with only two tracks, then I have no quality loss . And if I export my tracks one by one to a external (analog) recorder, and mix them there, I'll have no quality loss at all... I'm glad I finally understand. I'm too old for all this technical stuff.

btw. is Vestman talking about a 16 bit mix engine? or 32 bit? or 64 bit?

[ericj23]

yep i think our deluded friend thinks that there is no quality loss within an analogue summing system

think about it if you have a guitarist on one side and a bass player on the other - as they play individually you can hear each of them well

but if they play at the same time you don't - there is all sorts of interference between each others signals

so any summing produces distortion - even in analogue, like this example

try again little troll boy

and yes burning a cd is an analogue process just like a cassette - it's a shame that you don't know what analogue and digital is

you might make more sense then

PS do you purr ? - would it help if i was nice to you ? - or does your heart belong to john ?

[Sascha Franck]

Is rendering a multitrack mix into a stereo file within a DAW also an analogue process?

No. And that's why it's allways working as supposed to. At least over here.

Burning a CD is an analog process? Just like a cassette, huh?

So, the CD you burn things on is a digital thing? 1s and 0s? Last time I checked it was a silver-ish disk with a hole in the middle and I could even do a mobile out of a few scratched ones. Looked pretty much analog to me.
And while we are at scratching them, I managed to do that with a screwdriver, instead of using a pocket calculator - which would probably be what you'd try, as it's 1s and 0s....

[cptgone]

I also keep all my applications on my external firewire drive so they're more phat too. I'm running a phat Firefox right now.

Firefox over Firewire? Whoa... Activate Freeze in your host or you'll be toast!

[hvaring]

Do let's keep this thread running. A good, clean, fun and honest-to-God idiot is so hard to find these days.

[davor]

Do let's keep this thread running. A good, clean, fun and honest-to-God idiot is so hard to find these days.

Yes, you're the one. It's nice of you to share that notion with the world If it makes you feel better about yourself...

[davor]

yep i think our deluded friend thinks that there is no quality loss within an analogue summing system


so any summing produces distortion - even in analogue, like this example


and yes burning a cd is an analogue process just like a cassette - it's a shame that you don't know what analogue and digital is

you might make more sense then

?

And what is it that you burn in that process, you little wannabe quasy musician geek. What do you transfer in that process. What kind of data? The data on your CD is in digital format. It consists of ones and zeroes, doesn't it? You def amateur.

[davor]

Is rendering a multitrack mix into a stereo file within a DAW also an analogue process?

No. And that's why it's allways working as supposed to. At least over here.


As I said if you can't hear the difference then there's no problem for you. Case closed.

Burning a CD is an analog process? Just like a cassette, huh?

So, the CD you burn things on is a digital thing? 1s and 0s? Last time I checked it was a silver-ish disk with a hole in the middle and I could even do a mobile out of a few scratched ones. Looked pretty much analog to me.
And while we are at scratching them, I managed to do that with a screwdriver, instead of using a pocket calculator - which would probably be what you'd try, as it's 1s and 0s....

Are you a dumb ass, or you just pretend to be one? A CD is a piece of plastic. I've never claimed that a piece of plastic is a digital thing. What I'm saying is that the data that that piece of plastic carries is in the digital format. It consists of zeroes and ones. In the process of burning you transfer those zeroes and ones onto that dicc, i.e. the laser burns tiny pits on the surface of the disc, and those pits contain data which is in the digital format. Furthermore, why do we then have a/d (analog to digital) converters and d/a (digital to analog) converters, if the data is in the analog format all along.

[M'Snah]

I'm convinced now. Should I buy a 32-bit analog mixer? or 64-bit?

[donkey tugger]