Page 4 of 12

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 11:42 am
by SubFunk
Ok, some things are obvious! I cant say that live's reverb is better that logic's lol... but you know what i mean!
Live's reverb is first class if you need the sound of a fart in a coke can... i agree!

:lol:

no, i hear you! yeah some of the Live plugs are very cool, they are all usable... and we can argue and discuss them to death...

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:35 pm
by Hermanus
Yesterday, Someone told me something that says all
Whatever hardware or software you use, XLR cables, spdif or cinch_ As long as your music has some heart and sounds great, The task is almost complete!
Am I the only Live user marvelously astonished by the sound engine?
Seriously, I understand the worries here. But if you catch the way, it's fully rewarding and so fun to work with.

Whining slows down your work.

And what? Now people pay for products they know they're not going to like?

I'm ok when someone like Subfunk is complaining about real problems with live, and wanna have a stable DAW to work with.
I'm not with the free rantings that lead nowhere

Well Iget back to work :twisted:

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:41 pm
by kb420
Image

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 2:57 pm
by leedsquietman
Live has improved many things plugin wise since Live 6. (where EQ8 was a major improvement)

Live 7 - Dithering added (pow-r); compressor vastly improved. For Suite owners - the AAS licensed synths, improvements to Sampler and Operator.
Live 8 - multiband dynamics, vocoder and limiter added - previously no multiband compressor or limiter. Collison/Corpus/Latin Percussion and improvements to Operator (user customizable waveforms etc).


Where Live falls down -

REVERB - all of the competition now have decent quality convolution reverbs. Live's reverb - polarizes people - you either love it or hate it.
PITCH CORRECTION - Included in Logic, Cubase (with advanced melodyne type correction now in C5) and Sonar V-Vocal etc.
Channel Strip type plugins such as VC64 in Sonar. Modelled vintage type plugins - Live 7's compressor has various modes to make a more vintage sound, but doesn't specifically have a 'vintage' range of EQs or compressors.

But a lot of this goes back to people's misconceptions that Live is just an audio tweakbox or something that needs to be rewired to a 'proper DAW' because of it's unique design (and the first 3-4 versions of Live had such rudimentary feature sets in terms of advanced audio editing and MIDI), people don't give it the recognition it deserves.

The other factor is the price. It could be argued that Logic and Cubase give you almost as much as the Live Suite, yet cost significantly less. This is a recent phenomenon brought about by Apple aggressively price cutting Logic Studio 8, but Ableton did not follow as they consider their product to have hard core customers and in a niche. Also, Cubase and Logic come with around 60 audio FX plugins, as opposed to 30 ish in Live 8.

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 3:16 pm
by jlgrimes
leedsquietman wrote:Live has improved many things plugin wise since Live 6. (where EQ8 was a major improvement)

Live 7 - Dithering added (pow-r); compressor vastly improved. For Suite owners - the AAS licensed synths, improvements to Sampler and Operator.
Live 8 - multiband dynamics, vocoder and limiter added - previously no multiband compressor or limiter. Collison/Corpus/Latin Percussion and improvements to Operator (user customizable waveforms etc).


Where Live falls down -

REVERB - all of the competition now have decent quality convolution reverbs. Live's reverb - polarizes people - you either love it or hate it.
PITCH CORRECTION - Included in Logic, Cubase (with advanced melodyne type correction now in C5) and Sonar V-Vocal etc.
Channel Strip type plugins such as VC64 in Sonar. Modelled vintage type plugins - Live 7's compressor has various modes to make a more vintage sound, but doesn't specifically have a 'vintage' range of EQs or compressors.

But a lot of this goes back to people's misconceptions that Live is just an audio tweakbox or something that needs to be rewired to a 'proper DAW' because of it's unique design (and the first 3-4 versions of Live had such rudimentary feature sets in terms of advanced audio editing and MIDI), people don't give it the recognition it deserves.

The other factor is the price. It could be argued that Logic and Cubase give you almost as much as the Live Suite, yet cost significantly less. This is a recent phenomenon brought about by Apple aggressively price cutting Logic Studio 8, but Ableton did not follow as they consider their product to have hard core customers and in a niche. Also, Cubase and Logic come with around 60 audio FX plugins, as opposed to 30 ish in Live 8.

Live's reverb is its weakest point.

There is nothing majorly wrong with the sound engine though. It has 64 bit summing and 32bit plug-in processing. Sonar has a complete 64 bit engine but that is the only program that has it completely.
I'm also not sure what Panning Law Live is using either but the Panning Law also affects the audio engine though but whatever Panning Law Live uses is more of a convention than a flaw. (they should have an option we can change though).

I think most programmers are waiting for the O.S.s to truly switch to 64 bit, which would make the probably make the 64 bit engines easier to code.

If everybody stays on 32 bit O.S. the software companys will be fairly slow to change.

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 3:47 pm
by mikemc
ok, i'll see what i can do, facepalmer dudes...
Image

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 5:10 pm
by kb420
Image

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 5:51 pm
by knotkranky
There's an unwritten rule when posting opinions on audio quality:

"Post your fucking music or stfu"

That way we know if your opinion is worth anything.

Men post their "quality" sound, kids go; bla bla bla.


Image

they are cute though. )


That should do it.

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:06 pm
by evon
My two cents: Every other DAW I have listened to sounds better than Live.
The difference in sound though, is tolerable/insignificant, and I tend to make a tade-off for the sound with the better workflow and flexibility that Live provides.

In addition, a good knowledge of Live's capabilities, along with the use of other DAW's for thier various specialities tends to afford me the best of both worlds.

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:13 pm
by Johnisfaster
evon wrote:Every other DAW I have listened to sounds better than Live.
And then you looked at the numbers and realized they were exactly the same.

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:28 am
by Bynar
I strive for poor sound quality. Artifacts and glitches sound way better than $$$ plugins. It should be about the music anyway. Let them say Live sounds worse I say.

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 6:52 am
by knotkranky
\m/

:D

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:03 am
by crumhorn
Any difference that you hear originates somewhere between your ears. The last component in the audio chain.

Listening to the opinions of 'experts' or spending more money on equipment can have a profound effect on the performance of this component.

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 11:53 am
by silveriofunk
UKRuss wrote:No. Just no. Not again. For gods sake stop the thread.
+1

Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...

Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 12:12 pm
by 3osc
All of this new-fangled digital shit sounds the same anyways. I only record onto wax discs for that nice analog warmth.