Lives sound engine argument again ...

[Ajbbklyn]

I updated some projects from 7 to 8. These projects contained warping. When I imported into 8 I changed the warp mode to Complex Pro. The stuff literally came to life. Which means it was there in the source audio from the very beginning.

I don't have the sophisticated tools to measure the minute differences between DAWs. All I have is a pair of 53 year old ears which, thankfully, have not been tinned.

If you have good microphones, a good interface, a good room and a well set up machine, all you need is Live and you're golden.

Period.

[SubFunk]

lm wrote:

no matter what software you choose to time stretch audio with, it will always change the sound quality of that audio.

absolute correct, does not mean that they can't work further on better warping algos.. i mean they are already friends with serato, right?

i am just working on a tune and i have a female vocal... it's just a jazzy type of ahhh... vox with some vibrato... no matter which algo i use it sounds like i use a vocoder... a bit of colour would be fine... but those are serious artifacts, not nice... so i would like a just a little more neutral.

it's just one example... however, i can simply see the 'issues' the one or other has with Lives warping... as great as it is.

[Tone Deft]

thing is, many DAWs use the same warping engines that were developed by third party companies.

[SubFunk]

thing is, many DAWs use the same warping engines that were developed by third party companies.

yo! that is why i urge to use pitch n' time from serato...

[knotkranky]

@lm

no matter what software you choose to time stretch audio with, it will always change the sound quality of that audio.

Your right but not all are equal.

"better" warping won't make warping neutral. You should know enough to understand that.

Better warping will allow me and some others to do what we want to do in Live at the level we want it to. It's a small group I suppose, but here we are.

And no, i don't think that using live without warp is pointless. I don't see any reason to use warping while making music in live unless you're after using it as an effect. Live does a lot more than just rough real time time stretching.

True but the lion-share of most users certainly are using warp and ethios4 is correct and i'll agree, most don't understnd it and yap off a bunch of bs about quality. You bet. They're idiots.

To not ask abes for improvements would be...... well i just don't understand why. But yes, this thread is stupid and my words don't look good in it.



@Tone Deft, i'll take your word for it and in the spirit of an earlier post of mine, evon should post his music to prove if he even needs it.


@ethios4, I agree with everything you've said.


@ all of ya - glad you're satisfied and think there is no room for improvement in this one isolated particular spot in this great program. I for one see room for improvement in warp. So does abes I bet you.

[ethios4]

I agree that warping could/should be better. Complex Pro is a bit nicer than Complex, but I was disappointed that it still sounds unnatural. If there's going to be a supposedly top-end warping algorithm (as Complex Pro is supposed to be) it should really be the best time-stretching algorithm currently available, imo....even if it's an offline only function. I imagine the Abes went with Complex Pro because it is by the same company they licensed Complex from, and it's still lite enough to be realtime.

[Tone Deft]

for the guys that take this shit seriously and get paid...

when it comes to time stretching, does that approach "you're doing it wrong?" IOW the band should play in time and those kinds of corrections get into "Bitch Slap" (Mixerman) territory, things like Melodyne etc that fake the craft.

obviously it's done but is it akin to using BS tricks like Melodyne?

this is a pretty optimistic question in terms of true talent in the industry, just curious.



then of course there's music creation where you want to take a loop from anywhere and use it with anything, I'm more thinking of traditional band tracking.

[knotkranky]

I record/produce as if all that fixit crap isn't there if time permits.

I rather comp 8 tracks of painstaking vocal sessions and get it that way. Then, if i need to sweeten the pitch there's much less to do while asking the app to not dig so deep. It sounds wayyyyy better like that.

The short answer is that it's more a producers world now, not a band world so much anymore and there are lots of un-artful timesaving "issues" that come with that.

I'm in a building with 7 other studios, composers, producers. The faster they go, the more they make. They love all those fakeit plugins and apps.

[Tone Deft]

^ interesting view, makes sense. the age of the Kanye Wests and Melodyne. sad.

[UKRuss]

Ooooo, a Kanye West Plug in you say?

Kanye.vst

[SubFunk]

knotkranky wrote:

I rather comp 8 tracks of painstaking vocal sessions and get it that way.

plus one... if you are recording, producing and mixing in one hand... then it;s to me as well the art and essence to get the max. out of an artist, tracking is hard work. and also rather take dozens of takes and push the musicians towards what i want... the better the material of the recording, the better the result without adding to much crap...

[evon]

yeah, evon the power user. what he knows about DAWs you can fit on the back of a matchbook. just another n00b with a bullshit opinion. he's had plenty of time to demonstrate any DAW knowledge but I haven't seen it.

sorry evon, you have an OK personality but if you want to sling the shit you'd better have the ammo. you're firing blanks. no cred points.

all DAWs sound more than good enough for 99% of what people use them for. as if peoples' production chops are good enough that this kind of bullshit matters.


this is what guys do with ANY hobby, cars, motorcycles, surfing, biking, ANYTHING. we talk shit about what the other guy uses because what we use is teh shit.

I'm not reading 4 pages of this crap, has there been any real proof posted or is this just n00b chest beating bullshit?

Yes TD, you know by your comment that I am forced to reply to your statements. My statements can be very powerful and usually are capable of evoking that kind of reaction, so I understand.
However, we are each giving our honest opinion here on this forum once again about what we are hearing/perceiving.

As a Live user I gave my opinion on what I was hearing/perceiving in the sound and not a scientific explaination of it.

In addition, there are quite a lot of users, who seem to share my perception. Another of the points you raised is that being a noob also allows me to listen more neutrally, so if you are as wise as youre trying to make out, then you would have contemplated this. So, you not knowing this seems to make you more of a noob than me.

Anyway, it is a shame to bring this useful forum to such a low level. The more mature users would prefer to use this forum, as has always been the case, in assisting in Live being where it is today,by providing a vehicle to acheive the ultimate heights for the benefit of us all.

[evon]

@Tone Deft, i'll take your word for it and in the spirit of an earlier post of mine, evon should post his music to prove if he even needs it.

This is not about music.this is about sound.. the quality... the characteristics of a sound!!
Based on all the unbiased comments..Live sucks in comparison.
Speak to the guys that make hits..guys that know how to make sounds pleasing to sell millions.
Lets face it, that definately is not Live's forte.

[Tone Deft]

fuck the mature users. I do applaud your mature response.

it's a strong statement to post on a DAW's forum that it sounds worse than other DAWs. people will read statements like that and judge the software accordingly. it's a judgment on the bread and butter of the company's quality profile.

it's no so much n00b calling as it's not being able to say "evon has produced some amazing sounding tracks. he's also taken tracks from other people and made them shine in a way I never knew possible. so, when he says Live doesn't sound good it says something."

I in no way am saying my ears, my production skills, my experience or my home studio is good enough to say Live sounds as good or better than other DAWs. what I can say is that for a vast majority of users something as simple as the sound quality of a DAW is not an issue and it's a ridiculous topic to debate. it's 2009, these things have been developed for decades and it's a very simple thing for them to measure and quantify. audio is a pretty simple type of signal, we deal with 20Hz to 20kHz signals on computers that run on Gigahertz signals, it's not rocket science to make a high fidelity DAW.


anyone can and most will say that such and such DAW sounds bad, but nobody can or will post evidence.

[SubFunk]

@ evon,

that is rubbish, yes you are right that Live is not much used compared to other apps for "at a million sold hits..."

you want see it much for tracking big projects or mixdowns of 'hits' in commercial recording environments...

but the reason is not the actual audio quality (at least since 7) but more the lack of certain functions and typical studio workflows... then again Live IS our days used more and more in 'traditional' environments, because of it's uniqueness in certain areas...