KVR Audio

dimitar · Post by **dimitar** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 6:39 pm

Wich of them - Sonar 3 or Cubase sx 2 approach the Sound Quality of Pro Tools LE

I have not a chance to make COMPARISON

Pls Help me!

Btw i think Sonar have more accurate Mid range

may be just presume

thanks in advance
best regards Dimitar

kritikon · Post by **kritikon** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 7:25 pm

I wasn't aware there was any discernible difference in sound quality between them.

The major difference is the native/non native aspect and the sturdy reliability of ProTools (that is the main reason studios etc go for ProTools or Soundscape etc - reliability, not sound quality)

quincy · Post by **quincy** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:08 pm

kritikon wrote:I wasn't aware there was any discernible difference in sound quality between them.

The major difference is the native/non native aspect and the sturdy reliability of ProTools (that is the main reason studios etc go for ProTools or Soundscape etc - reliability, not sound quality)

I have never known much about pro-tools other than that its a high-end audio ediing suite.

I did wonder why it seems so prolific within pro studios. I knew it couldn't be that it was just "better" than other software/hardware. I guess with bigger studios and more money involved, mistakes cost more.

Makes sense. Doesn't appeal to me though, probably wouldn't run on my PC

Robert Randolph · Post by **Robert Randolph** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:11 pm

Actually as far as Ive been able to discern from various developer discussions, sonar and cubase both are technically better than PTLE, by quite a bit.

PT certainly has it's own sound though, that's very familiar... I wouldnt say it's bad either. It's often not hard to tell a mix that was done in protools.

*shrug* as if it matters though, no one who listens to the music but yourself will care.. and if you care that much, just use PT.

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 8:01 am

quincy wrote:I did wonder why it seems so prolific within pro studios. I knew it couldn't be that it was just "better" than other software/hardware.

Often these things come down to the fact that one app will have leapt ahead with a killer feature in an early version and, having risen to dominance, they often rest on their laurels and are overtaken by the competition. Even so, they rarely lose their status because they have become so entrenched. e.g. I think Corel Photopaint has significant advantages over Photoshop now but that war was won in 1995 when Adobe introduced layers.

Scotrick · Post by **Scotrick** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 5:10 pm

yeah, this is a question that just won't die, I guess it's only natural to assume such a thing, that different programs sound different... but there's a cd out there that compares all the major DAW programs using the SAME audio input devices, and found that there is NO DIFFERENCE between the DAW sounds... NONE....
and think about it, even if there were... how many variables do you have even before you get to the computer's hard drive? the performer, the instrument, the room, maybe a mic, or maybe the quality of the electronics of the instrument, to the preamp to the audio to digital converter, to the sound card (which might be the same as the the A/D and might not) and finally to the computer... this list is where the real audio 'quality,' comes from, at the start... then you have the plug-ins used inside the DAW of choice... DON'T WORRY about the DAW, worry about the above stuff... (and that's only the audio going in, your studio monitor speakers and room treatment are going to mess with the audio coming out)
I know it's easier to think, gee, maybe I should 'improve,' my sound by buying 'x,' or 'y,' or whatever... but work on the song writing instead... you'll be happier in the long run

!!! approach Sound Quality !!!