SAMPLITUDE RULES (DAW Summing)

[fandango]

Perhaps not all renders start at 0 samples (for whatever programmer code-compensated reason). If one render was 1 sample out (shifted 1 sample left or right), wouldn't you get the possibility of spikes from different subtracted values?

I've just had a big lunch, I may not be thinking clearly.

[stefancrs]

No, it's white noise, you'd get "full range" noise out as well. I made sure they were aligned, sample wise.

[fandango]

D'oh, of course!

Had the picture of rendered drum beats in my mind.

[stefancrs]

EnergyXT, "lowered faders" using additional plugin for each channel (eXT's volume control is just 7bit, so an external plug was needed), difference from Podium at ~ -135dB. No spikes. Result could be dependant upon which gain plugin that is used.

Btw, I do the difference readouts "visually" and go by the peaks (exluding the spikes in the Tracktion cancellation), not the RMS. RMS would give way lower values.

[stefancrs]

Vegas, 24bit mixdown, faders at 0dB, difference from Podium at < -138dB
Vegas, 24bit mixdown, "lowered faders", difference from Podium at < -138dB

And this is when going from 32bit float -> 24bit integer (right?) -> 32bit float and THEN comparing the outputs. Very good results imo.

[Stupid American Pig]

I bet you that every daw available today has less noise than an analog desk from the sixties. Its a good thing that the engineers back then didnt know that, otherwise they would have stopped making music coz the equipment was inferior...

[nuisance sonore]

And this is when going from 32bit float -> 24bit integer (right?) -> 32bit float and THEN comparing the outputs. Very good results imo.

Right, while I believe Vegas engine is 32 bit float internally, it can only record and output to 24 bit integer.

Would be cool if all those who participated in this thread could join result from their respective host, doesn't take much more than a few minutes, then we could put the issue to rest once and for all as far as KVR is concerned.

[daGuru]

Well, that would require intelligence and co-ordination, which, unfortunately is severly lacking within this place, my friend LOL

[jupiter8]

Problem is, i'll bet you none of the Samplitude guys will post their results here.

(Nevermind me,just being a bit cynical today)

[zeoy]

Yes but Samplitude sound is 36% more detailed

[Stupid American Pig]

but what happens if someone uses one of these apps that the numbers show to be inferior?

[jupiter8]

If I go insane, please don't put your wires in my brain ...

Well, you have and i won't.

[zeoy]

You're a liar and a thief

[stefancrs]

but what happens if someone uses one of these apps that the numbers show to be inferior?

Their own perceptual world will implode?

[stefancrs]

Regarding my shorter renders, maybe the problem is that I checked the "only render marked region" setting and maybe the markers were a bit off.

If you feel up to it, could you put all the noise wavs a bit in into the arrangement (like half a second) and make a new render where you make sure atleast the entire noise*.wav gets played back? I can trim it to be precisely 22050 and aligned with the other mixdowns afterwards. This way, if someone would feel like hosting and writing a small conclusive text or something, could put the mixdowns from all the hosts tested online, and they'd all be exactly 22050 samples long (half a second of noise), phase aligned etc. So anyone could easily replicate the test if they wanted to.