Reason sound doesn't sell is not true

[hibidy]

A DAW is a DAW, just like an EQ is an EQ.

not all eq's sound the same

[BMoore]

A DAW is a DAW, just like an EQ is an EQ.

not all eq's sound the same

Exactly.

[liquidsound]

Every time I listen to my own mixes again and again they sound different again and again.... Never mind your DAW.
Sound is liquid...

[ras.s]

It may be as simple as there is plenty of industry weight against it; and that indeed there are audio mt softs that are mandated to sound a certain way. I used Harrison Mixbus as an example of a mixing soft that constantly (in it's current iteration, anyway) is running DSP to emulate their namesake's signature desk.

What sequencers actually have a dedicated, unique mixer? Reason and Mixbus?

With analog consoles, the sound each brand/model makes is their most important selling point. Most host software do their best to not sound like anything at all. Which is a bit sad - they aren't instruments like real mixers are. Reason does it differently and people love them for that.

If VoS or u-he would release a 12-channel mixer plugin, not just a channel strip but the whole thing, all of KVR would break apart totally.

[trimph1]

There was one thread on Cakewalk's forum wherein someone likened X2 to sounding like an early Motown sound. Monophonic. Turned out that it was the infamous interleave issue he encountered.

This little bug was one that made you think you recorded in stereo when in fact the recording got done in mono. You had to check 2 or 3 times to make sure you had it right.

[goldenanalog]

It may be as simple as there is plenty of industry weight against it; and that indeed there are audio mt softs that are mandated to sound a certain way. I used Harrison Mixbus as an example of a mixing soft that constantly (in it's current iteration, anyway) is running DSP to emulate their namesake's signature desk.

What sequencers actually have a dedicated, unique mixer? Reason and Mixbus?

With analog consoles, the sound each brand/model makes is their most important selling point. Most host software do their best to not sound like anything at all. Which is a bit sad - they aren't instruments like real mixers are. Reason does it differently and people love them for that.

If VoS or u-he would release a 12-channel mixer plugin, not just a channel strip but the whole thing, all of KVR would break apart totally.

Like IncarnateX, excellent question, ras.s!

Several things to consider:

1.) A soft Co. may well be at legal-consequential risk 'if' they divulge that their software MT is modeled after say: a Euphonix desk, as an example. Licensing is involved if you want to model.

I favor Samplitude, to my ears has a great sound; I suspect that it's sonic signature comes from modeled hardware, but I would never ask them where it came from - don't need to know.

2.) It may be that modeling a mixer's overall behavior is a higher order of complexity that may well exceed even modeling present holy grail analog synths by comparison (depending: much higher component counts, signal paths, and specialized electronic parts); as all of 'this' DSP stuff progresses, we should see exactly that.

[IncarnateX]

An actual set of double blind tests get quite specific and time-consuming as audio engineers chase down all of the parameters that need to be nulled in order to objectify the tests and create a valid data set - not trivial. Take that into account with the flood of audio software, computer considerations, a proper controlled environment to conduct such tests and the funding to support the work, it's no wonder that there is a lack of actual reporting 'out there

If this is true then I think it has some consequences to the certainty to which the nay sayers usually present their case: There is no real recognized scientific studies that provide evidence of the nay sayer position, are there? I have seen a user claim there was no differences, when he performed a null test, and another claim there was. This leaves is in need of a real study to go beyond forum reports.

However, the whole question might be interesting, but it is hard to see the relevance to the way we normally use Daws, namely with effects and all the list of settings that can make a difference, not to speak of the material used, emotional and visual preferences, that is, we use them quite individually according to preferences and skills that means way more than subtle differences in a basic sound would.

Finally, if someone really claims he loves the sound of a daw, what assholes are we - the nay believers- to try to convince him otherwise?

Nah, only if someone claims a daw sound like shit (like in this case) and/or obviously is trolling (like in this case) should we act and kick his ass. I am all in for that.

[goldenanalog]

I agree with everything that you say, IncarnateX; and would further argue that there have been significant works of audio art produced by 'inferior' equipment in the hands of an artisan...

To think that Edward Van Halen established his dominance with a broken electric guitar.

Even if Reason did sound inferior compared to the other guys (ridiculous) all it takes is someone that knows what he or she is doing....

This whole thread is a trollfest, but people like you rock, IncarnateX!

[ras.s]

Yea, Samplitude has built-in equalizers, and so does Orion.

Personally, I wouldn't care if a mixer is emulated on a certain brand - I'd prefer if it was something clever and innovative, unique to the software itself. Even that would be huge step forward with software mixers which stand as quite bland as they are today.

But indeed the emulation route would be quite hard to take. The sheer price of the high-end consoles leaves a lot of developers out. But taking on the task could yield some very interesting results. Not just sonically but also from the user interface experience point of view (trying to somewhat emulate a console today most likely includes loading one - three plugins on each channel and having an overview of their settings is quite hard compared to glimpsing at an mixer).



And no software has dim-buttons.

[LawrenceF]

And no software has dim-buttons.

Sure they (some) do.

[ras.s]

Give me names. NAMES !!

[LawrenceF]

Cubase control room has dim, so does Ardour IIRC. I'm sure they're not the only two. Oh, and Logic.

But your point is well taken, software mixers do not typically do an acceptable job of mimicking console master sections.

[ras.s]

Yea, there's lot to be done in the whole mixer departments, hopefully we'll see some changes in the future.


Just imagine the arguments we'll have then.

- "My DAW sounds better!"
- "Oh dear, so it does"
- "But my DAW sounds bet... hey you're not supposed to say that!"

[hibidy]

Trollfest? Valuable information here

Did you not learn that you can't get good sound from reason? I for one am thankful I don't use it

[goldenanalog]

Trollfest? Valuable information here

Did you not learn that you can't get good sound from reason? I for one am thankful I don't use it

LOL!