KVR Audio

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:51 am

Pipelineaudio wrote:
hibidy wrote: again, I neither believe or disbelieve what you are saying, I am again stating that if live 7 is advertised with a better sounding/summing/whatever engine.........it goes against anything discussed to this point as far as results.......no?
No.

Justin Frankel has also shown that there are some errors possible in some systems. They only happen some of the time, but perhaps they could have a cumulative effect.

This effect is an ERROR. It isnt that it sounds better or worse, the issue to me is more that it doesnt give you what you put in, when you tell it to.

This may be what ableton is talking about and what they have dealt with

Enhanced Audio EngineLive 7's enhanced audio engine improves fidelity with precision 64-bit summing at all mix points throughout the program, POW-r dithering, optimized sample-rate conversion and other advances.

Sounds to me like they are advertising an "fidelity" improvement..........which is from the website, which is why I brought it up

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:52 am

hibidy wrote:I can't understand what else I have to say to prove I'm not trying to be rude, force opinions............etc........

I neither believe or disbelieve what you are saying. Are you being rude and trying to stir up more trouble? Though I do not care "what" the answer is, I don't think I am alone in saying it's essential to have the thesis, the body of work, and the results in an outline before we decide you are not trying to irritate anybody.

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:53 am

Pipelineaudio wrote:
hibidy wrote: again, I neither believe or disbelieve what you are saying, I am again stating that if live 7 is advertised with a better sounding/summing/whatever engine.........it goes against anything discussed to this point as far as results.......no?
No.

Justin Frankel has also shown that there are some errors possible in some systems. They only happen some of the time, but perhaps they could have a cumulative effect.

If the error is relative to the sound level (which it is), it won't have a cumulative effect. There's nothing "adding up", SNR remains constant no matter how many signals or processes you apply.

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:54 am

hibidy wrote:remember, I did use dead horse in the title...........that out a account for something in my favor

I'll tell you one that I do not believe (and I admit...I should have been more clear on this being the number one reason I started this stupid thing), and that's that I need to spend 99 bucks to solve a math problem. As far as I can tell, it's as much of a scam as anything......the proper way (if you want people to believe the so called fact) is to list it as common knowledge.

Quite frankly, I have allot of things I can sell for 99 bucks that you can come to your own conclusions on.......

2+2 = 4? send me a check and I'll show you how to prove it's right.......here's my address..........

Who is trying to sell the solution to a math problem for 99 bucks? They did plenty of other things in their update too, no?

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:55 am

hibidy wrote:
Enhanced Audio EngineLive 7's enhanced audio engine improves fidelity with precision 64-bit summing at all mix points throughout the program, POW-r dithering, optimized sample-rate conversion and other advances.
Sounds to me like they are advertising an "fidelity" improvement..........which is from the website, which is why I brought it up

Parts of those improvements might very well improve the audio quality. The 64 bit summing not being one of them.

Pipelineaudio · Post by **Pipelineaudio** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:56 am

hibidy wrote: Sounds to me like they are advertising an "fidelity" improvement..........which is from the website, which is why I brought it up

Yes, and as soon as you learn the definition of fidelity, you will realize that that is EXACTLY what fixing errors will achieve

Download this test and do it yourself

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=193425

If you dont try it but want to keep yakking in here, then you are just a troll stirring up shit, any other course of action makes you dishonest or a jackass...a jackass could be forgiven I suppose, but dishonesty? Thats just willfull

If you DO try it, and come up with results that dont null (except of course in the instances stated), then post them here and congratulations you will be a hero

Usually when you put frauds up to a real test they try and cop out saying shit like " oh I dont REALLY care that much" (even though they yakked for 4 pages)

Or "the test is rigged"

but I give you the benefit of the doubt

If you DO care, and arent just trolling, youll do the test

We will be here awaiting your results

Pipelineaudio · Post by **Pipelineaudio** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:58 am

stefancrs wrote: If the error is relative to the sound level (which it is), it won't have a cumulative effect. There's nothing "adding up", SNR remains constant no matter how many signals or processes you apply.

The test Justin showed, showed an effect that got worse as more tracks were added. Also, Tallisman's Nuendo test seemed to show similar results.

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:00 am

Pipelineaudio wrote:
stefancrs wrote: If the error is relative to the sound level (which it is), it won't have a cumulative effect. There's nothing "adding up", SNR remains constant no matter how many signals or processes you apply.
The test Justin showed, showed an effect that got worse as more tracks were added. Also, Tallisman's Nuendo test seemed to show similar results.

woop! url me!

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:02 am

Cordelia wrote:
hibidy wrote:I can't understand what else I have to say to prove I'm not trying to be rude, force opinions............etc........
I neither believe or disbelieve what you are saying. Are you being rude and trying to stir up more trouble? Though I do not care "what" the answer is, I don't think I am alone in saying it's essential to have the thesis, the body of work, and the results in an outline before we decide you are not trying to irritate anybody.

at any rate, cordilia (chase is it ?

)

if someone states they are not trying to do something, it's ok to accept that. There is no need to second guess or try and get even with them. I'm sorry this subject upsets you so, but you could have just ignored it.......kinda like your telling me to do.......

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:04 am

stefancrs wrote:
hibidy wrote:remember, I did use dead horse in the title...........that out a account for something in my favor

I'll tell you one that I do not believe (and I admit...I should have been more clear on this being the number one reason I started this stupid thing), and that's that I need to spend 99 bucks to solve a math problem. As far as I can tell, it's as much of a scam as anything......the proper way (if you want people to believe the so called fact) is to list it as common knowledge.

Quite frankly, I have allot of things I can sell for 99 bucks that you can come to your own conclusions on.......

2+2 = 4? send me a check and I'll show you how to prove it's right.......here's my address..........
Who is trying to sell the solution to a math problem for 99 bucks? They did plenty of other things in their update too, no?

who knows? The results are not published.

Pipelineaudio · Post by **Pipelineaudio** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:05 am

http://www.cockos.com/forum/showthread. ... 473&page=2

Just bits of it there, but more is coming soon, everyone's got AES right now

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:05 am

are you guys reading what you are writing?

It's not adding up the way it's supposed to............

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:06 am

hibidy wrote:
stefancrs wrote:
hibidy wrote:remember, I did use dead horse in the title...........that out a account for something in my favor

I'll tell you one that I do not believe (and I admit...I should have been more clear on this being the number one reason I started this stupid thing), and that's that I need to spend 99 bucks to solve a math problem. As far as I can tell, it's as much of a scam as anything......the proper way (if you want people to believe the so called fact) is to list it as common knowledge.

Quite frankly, I have allot of things I can sell for 99 bucks that you can come to your own conclusions on.......

2+2 = 4? send me a check and I'll show you how to prove it's right.......here's my address..........
Who is trying to sell the solution to a math problem for 99 bucks? They did plenty of other things in their update too, no?
who knows? The results are not published.

Huh? I mean that what you get for the 99 bucks isn't just changed maths.

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:09 am

hibidy wrote:
Cordelia wrote:
hibidy wrote:I can't understand what else I have to say to prove I'm not trying to be rude, force opinions............etc........
I neither believe or disbelieve what you are saying. Are you being rude and trying to stir up more trouble? Though I do not care "what" the answer is, I don't think I am alone in saying it's essential to have the thesis, the body of work, and the results in an outline before we decide you are not trying to irritate anybody.
at any rate, cordilia (chase is it ? )

if someone states they are not trying to do something, it's ok to accept that. There is no need to second guess or try and get even with them. I'm sorry this subject upsets you so, but you could have just ignored it.......kinda like your telling me to do.......

As I have stated, I neither believe or disbelieve what you are saying.
My name is cordelia, not chase.

Pipelineaudio · Post by **Pipelineaudio** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:14 am

hibidy wrote:are you guys reading what you are writing?

It's not adding up the way it's supposed to............

Are you talking? Where's the test results?

dead horse (the resurrection)