Page 4 of 7
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2011 11:30 pm
by Machinesworking
beats me wrote:Is there any DAW out there that has a worse reputation than Live as far as end result?
Fruity Loops and Acid. Basically the DAWs that don't have all the features of the ones marketed as multitrack sequencers like Logic, Pro Tools, Cubase/Nuendo, Sonar, DP, Samplitude etc.
Having used Live, Logic and Digital Performer for songwriting it's always a nice mental trick that whatever DAW I switched to seemed to facilitate writing songs faster, (new environment etc.), but I've never thought that a particular DAW sounded different. Sure the effects and workflow is different, but the basic sound of an audio file in a track, nope.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:50 am
by poonti
Tarekith wrote:rekloos wrote:cause in the end our ears make the decision not our eyes.....
In general I agree with you, but at the same time our ears are biased too. I'm sure a lot of people have seen this, but I want to point it out again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ
I'll be the first to say that I don't always agree with Ethan Winer's comments in that video, and it's been proven many times that sometimes his understanding of digital audio can be a little.. lacking. But that does a really good job at showing how we can't always believe our ears, and that we can sometimes hear what we WANT to hear, and not what's really there. Worth a watch if you haven't seen that before.
Not to sound wishy washy, but I think anytime you talk about audio quality it's going to come down to some combination of provable scientific fact and emperical evidence. The problem is that many times people only focus on the emperical (what THEY can hear), and chose to ignore the scientific side of things.
Lol @Stairway to Heaven backwards ... time for me to go burn all my Zeppelin albums
! The auditory system and brain can be fooled on so many levels when it comes to audio perception (take a look at mp3 and other psycho-acoustically modeled encoders). Nice video, I'll have to finish it when I have some more time.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 4:52 am
by pencilrocket
I heard Live's stretch quality is worst among daws. I don't know actual scientific truth.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 4:56 am
by poonti
pencilrocket wrote:I heard Live's stretch quality is worst among daws. I don't know actual scientific truth.
scientific truth:
https://www.zplane.de/index.php?page=de ... -elastique
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 4:58 am
by pencilrocket
You don't seem scientific at all to me. Because there are no graph or chart at all though you said that is scientific. You could say it scientific if you showed me the test result in every daw listed.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:14 am
by Tarekith
That list he linked is all the audio apps that use the same time stretch algorithms that Live uses.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:31 am
by pencilrocket
Tarekith wrote:That list he linked is all the audio apps that use the same time stretch algorithms that Live uses.
Yes, I knew. But each daws treat audio data in each different ways. I have no evidence that each daws apply its algorithm equaly for a task. For instance, Reaper offers so many modes for each stretching mode even though it actually uses their algorithm. That's why I don't blindly believe "all streches sound same simply because all use elastique" logic.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:40 am
by lunabass
from memory live, cubase, reaper, ni, digital performer and soundforge all use elastique pro. it'd be interesting to know if time-stretching in these daw's all sound the same or if the technology is implemented differently in each... does anyone actually know?
pro tools, sonar and audition use izotope radius.
i've compared pro tools and live and didnt really feel that one was worse although they did sound different.
i've just recently purchased melodyne and i'm using it as a plug-in in live. although i haven't got much experience with it, i'd definitely say that pitch shifting a time-stretched loop sounds much better in melodyne than it does in live, there is a very noticeable difference between the two
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:33 am
by mharris
Its not scientific, but here is a video comparing the various warping / stretching methods of various DAWs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cFwIsudKvo
I don't know what scientific tests you could realistically do because its very subjective with no right or wrong end result.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 4:57 pm
by poonti
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:06 pm
by crumhorn
I like where this thread is going
NOT!!!
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:13 pm
by Tarekith
Ditto, much more interesting than my post.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:35 pm
by poonti
Sorry dudes, but I felt frisky this morning. Aren't you all glad you weren't born in the 1600's when, not only were there no DAW's to even scientifically compare, but you'd be living during a mini ice-age! Makes the whole question of whether Ableton properly implemented zplane's elastique, or not, kind of moot, no!?
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:51 pm
by pencilrocket
We have new funny noob.
Re: SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON, Live versus Logic
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:06 pm
by poonti
hi
