Every time I export an audiomixdown in cubase it sounds crap

[Ja.x]

I don't have Cubase, but Muzys. Mixdowns sounded like crap at 32 bits too, but never had a problem since I do it at 16 bits (44.1, 16 bits ).

[ericj23]

christ on a bike - what is it i have to read more clearly ?

the problem here has nothing to do with perceiving sound quality OK - nothing - what the problem is you have not understood this

i have tried being nice - now its time to start getting getting nasty


go and read a book

What makes you think you can convince davor? and more important: why would you care?

i don't and i don't

my dinner is cooking - so im sitting here for about another 10 minutes with nothing better to do

sad ain't it

[nuffink]

Congratulations davor. A worthy winner of the coveted feng shui motherboard award.

[M'Snah]

10 minutes... is that binary?

[davor]

how do you explain my test of doig the mixdowns and reversing the phase and getting nothing left ?

if you cant go away - you have nothing to add to this debate

You are not comparing two mixdowns, pal. You're comparing a mixdown version with the version whic has not been mixed down, but is a multitrack project in your sequencer. How can you compare that other than with your ears, Mr. Genius.

[davor]

oops you and your friend - bloody typo
- this is simple maths 1+1 = 2 every time

if you hear a difference you need your ears examined

Yes, I, and all the successful and sought after sound and mastering engineers who hear the difference, they all need their ears examined. And you, a would be amateur techno home quasi musician, you are the one to be taken as a judge. Sound is more than zeroes and ones, maybe after some 20 more years, you will come to be able to hear that. meanwhile I refer you to:

http://www.rogernichols.com/EQ/EQ_2000_02.html
http://nautiluspro.com/power_cords.htm

I'll quote Roger Nichols ( engineer for Steely Dan, and many others ) again ;
"Just remember, all of the expensive test gear said the pressings were perfect. The quality control people at the record company said we were crazy, the test equipment said the pressings were perfect. When asked if they listened to the CD pressing they said "No, do we need to?" Still the best piece of test gear is your ears."

He had similar problem when Steely Dan test cd didn't sound identical to the pressed one, although they were bit identical, and should have sounded identical according to the expensive test gear that the people like you used in the process of manufacturing. According to your mediocre ears, he would also be mildly insane.

from the same article

"Somehow the problem was in either the glass masters or the plating process afterwards that makes the stampers that press the CDs"

did you read those words - it was a fault with the glass mastering machine - nothing to do with digital generally

you are wrong OK

as for the cables article - yes a power supply improvement can reduce jitter - but that alas does not in any way affect how a computer adds up numbers

so the cord might reduce the noise in the output from your soundcard - but it will not in any way affect the mix within the box - becasue that is all time stamped maths

you really need to go and learn how computers work OK

No, now you're contradicting yourself pal. You sad that it's simple maths. If somethnig is mathematically bit identical, then it should sound identical, no? It' s all mather of maths. People like you called Mr nichols crazy, just like you call me insane, because mathematically there should not have been DIFFERENCE in sound, and all the test gear showed that there is no difference, it's only Mr. nichols ears, and the ears of his associates that spotted the difference, aALTHOUGH MATEMATHICALLY SPEAKING there should not have been any difference. Get it??

As regards the power cables, the difference was there also on playback. How do you explain that. Again the same zeroes and ones that MATHEMATICALLY speaking should sound the same, sounded differend upon the change of power cable. Get it?

i am not contradicting myself - your just a moron

"If somethnig is mathematically bit identical, then it should sound identical, no? " - well if played through differnt DAC's or the same one with a more efficient timing clock or a better power supply - NO

even though it is bit identical

the article clearly states the error was in the pressing machine - OK - nothing to do with maths

now this little debate is about the digital addition inside the computer - it has nothing to do with the DAC in this case

the reason the cables makes a difference on playback is that DAC used in your computer are outside the box they are a seperate digital device to your computers timestamped internal computations

It's you who are either a moron, or cannot read. They played back the SAME BIT IDENTICAL MATERIAL THROUGH THE SAME DAC, with the same power cord, and the same word clock, and it sounded DIFFERENT. YOu should read something before you venture into commenting on it, and as a consequence not knowing what you're talking about.

[ericj23]

how do you explain my test of doig the mixdowns and reversing the phase and getting nothing left ?

if you cant go away - you have nothing to add to this debate

You are not comparing two mixdowns, pal. You're comparing a mixdown version with the version whic has not been mixed down, but is a multitrack project in your sequencer. How can you compare that other than with your ears, Mr. Genius.

actually i am comparing a mixdown with a mixdown

didnt you notice that both files were mixdowns - the second one was a mixdown of a mixdown

sorry wrong, mr genius

[ericj23]

oops you and your friend - bloody typo
- this is simple maths 1+1 = 2 every time

if you hear a difference you need your ears examined

Yes, I, and all the successful and sought after sound and mastering engineers who hear the difference, they all need their ears examined. And you, a would be amateur techno home quasi musician, you are the one to be taken as a judge. Sound is more than zeroes and ones, maybe after some 20 more years, you will come to be able to hear that. meanwhile I refer you to:

http://www.rogernichols.com/EQ/EQ_2000_02.html
http://nautiluspro.com/power_cords.htm

I'll quote Roger Nichols ( engineer for Steely Dan, and many others ) again ;
"Just remember, all of the expensive test gear said the pressings were perfect. The quality control people at the record company said we were crazy, the test equipment said the pressings were perfect. When asked if they listened to the CD pressing they said "No, do we need to?" Still the best piece of test gear is your ears."

He had similar problem when Steely Dan test cd didn't sound identical to the pressed one, although they were bit identical, and should have sounded identical according to the expensive test gear that the people like you used in the process of manufacturing. According to your mediocre ears, he would also be mildly insane.

from the same article

"Somehow the problem was in either the glass masters or the plating process afterwards that makes the stampers that press the CDs"

did you read those words - it was a fault with the glass mastering machine - nothing to do with digital generally

you are wrong OK

as for the cables article - yes a power supply improvement can reduce jitter - but that alas does not in any way affect how a computer adds up numbers

so the cord might reduce the noise in the output from your soundcard - but it will not in any way affect the mix within the box - becasue that is all time stamped maths

you really need to go and learn how computers work OK

No, now you're contradicting yourself pal. You sad that it's simple maths. If somethnig is mathematically bit identical, then it should sound identical, no? It' s all mather of maths. People like you called Mr nichols crazy, just like you call me insane, because mathematically there should not have been DIFFERENCE in sound, and all the test gear showed that there is no difference, it's only Mr. nichols ears, and the ears of his associates that spotted the difference, aALTHOUGH MATEMATHICALLY SPEAKING there should not have been any difference. Get it??

As regards the power cables, the difference was there also on playback. How do you explain that. Again the same zeroes and ones that MATHEMATICALLY speaking should sound the same, sounded differend upon the change of power cable. Get it?

i am not contradicting myself - your just a moron

"If somethnig is mathematically bit identical, then it should sound identical, no? " - well if played through differnt DAC's or the same one with a more efficient timing clock or a better power supply - NO

even though it is bit identical

the article clearly states the error was in the pressing machine - OK - nothing to do with maths

now this little debate is about the digital addition inside the computer - it has nothing to do with the DAC in this case

the reason the cables makes a difference on playback is that DAC used in your computer are outside the box they are a seperate digital device to your computers timestamped internal computations

It's you who are either a moron, or cannot read. They played back the SAME BIT IDENTICAL MATERIAL THROUGH THE SAME DAC, with the same power cord, and the same word clock, and it sounded DIFFERENT. YOu should read something before you venture into commenting on it, and as a consequence not knowing what you're talking about.

give me a direct link to the article and I will explain to you where your wrong - do it quickly tho as I am away to get my eats

[IIRs]

They played back the SAME BIT IDENTICAL MATERIAL THROUGH THE SAME DAC, with the same power cord, and the same word clock, and it sounded DIFFERENT.

You are BOTH a moron AND you have no f**king ears:

Not only have you failed to understand that two files that cancel when one is inverted are identical, but you have also managed to convince yourself that you can hear a difference..

Its actually pretty funny..

[davor]

You are not comparing two mixdowns, pal. You're comparing a mixdown version with the version whic has not been mixed down, but is a multitrack project in your sequencer. How can you compare that other than with your ears, Mr. Genius.

actually i am comparing a mixdown with a mixdown

didnt you notice that both files were mixdowns - the second one was a mixdown of a mixdown

sorry wrong, mr genius

It's not the same Mr Genius. You're exporting the stereo mixdown, and compare it to another stereo mixdown. This is not a comparison of summing up. What are you exactly summing up if you're exporting a single stereo file?

[ericj23]

i actually wonder if english isnt his native language

i would forgive all then because it is easy to misunderstand the nuances of complex articles if it's not in your native tongue

either that or he/she is a moron

[davor]

They played back the SAME BIT IDENTICAL MATERIAL THROUGH THE SAME DAC, with the same power cord, and the same word clock, and it sounded DIFFERENT.

You are BOTH a moron AND you have no f**king ears:

Not only have you failed to understand that two files that cancel when one is inverted are identical, but you have also managed to convince yourself that you can hear a difference..

Its actually pretty funny..

OK, I am a moron, Roger Nichols is a moron, John Vestman is a moron, Bob Katz is a moron. We are all morons, an you Platinum ears, you are a genious. I just pity those who pay you for your "audio services" if there are such people, cause your ears are far from being platinum.

[ericj23]

OK

remember we are talking about an audio mixdown - not digital summing
the two things are different -

but no reference to an article - not frightened are you ?

ah didums - the little troll is so cute

anyway dinner is here so bye bye

[davor]

OK

remember we are talking about an audio mixdown - not digital summing
the two things are different -

but no reference to an article - not frightened are you ?

ah didums - the little troll is so cute

anyway dinner is here so bye bye

What is the difference. You are turning a multitrack project into a stereo file in both cases. The little genius is so ignorant, apart from that his hearing ability is challenged. When you're exporting a stereo file you're normally doing mastering, and not mixdown. Here is the link, you mathematical geek with a weak hearing ability

http://www.rogernichols.com/EQ/EQ_2000_02.html

[Evan]

Equilibrium...

Did you manage to sort it out?

What plugins did you use in the master bus? Try disabling them all and do a test mixdown. Perhaps there is a plug-in misbehaving on certain bitdepth/frequency settings you're using for mixdown?

Also try doing a real-time export (and if you are doing so, try a non-real-time one) and see if that changes anything. This setting is found in the export dialog I think.

Please report back with your findings.