CUBASE / ABLETON AGAIN

Discuss music production with Ableton Live.
radib
Posts: 314
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 3:11 am

Post by radib » Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:20 am

No, I am not blind.
-


"after all it wouldn´t have been possible without the impossible."

blaugruen7
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2002 9:17 am
Location: berlin
Contact:

Post by blaugruen7 » Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:24 am

there we have it!

8)

Tarekith
Posts: 19074
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:46 pm
Contact:

Post by Tarekith » Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:25 am

Live and SX shared the same pan law, no idea on Cubase 4 though I'd assume it's the same.

blaugruen7
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2002 9:17 am
Location: berlin
Contact:

Post by blaugruen7 » Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:53 am

i do at least remember that live is pan law=0
and you can set cubase to 0, too

pepezabala
Posts: 3501
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: In Berlin, finally

Post by pepezabala » Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:10 pm

radib wrote:People I´m sorry when that hurts you and you gotta run into those joking gesture.

(...) Or even using midi an 3rd party instruments. It sound better in its whole.
Hm, I also often noted that the midi-notes from live sound more blueish and bitter ...
radib wrote: Though it doesn´t come as surprise that most users don´t have enough taste in their ears to realize.
I probably fucked up the taste in my ears by sweet sweet music all the time. Or by smoking? I can't taste a difference between cubase and live anymore.

feyshay
Posts: 625
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Annapolis, MD

Post by feyshay » Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:34 pm

I really have not noticed a difference, except that I find Cubase cumbersome. I don't know how I would evaluate sound difference between the two. Maybe Cubase renders better as the cause. I guess I could take two clips and rendr them. Play them on an audio editor to see if there is a difference.
Really, I don't care. The slight difference in sound is the least of my problems with song-making.

Tarekith
Posts: 19074
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:46 pm
Contact:

Post by Tarekith » Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:55 pm

blaugruen7 wrote:i do at least remember that live is pan law=0
and you can set cubase to 0, too
Wrong, in Live it's -3dB:

http://www.ableton.com/forum/viewtopic. ... ht=pan+law

leisuremuffin
Posts: 4721
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 12:45 am
Location: New Jersey

Post by leisuremuffin » Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:11 pm

no, it's not -3db in the center. It's plus 3 db on the outer edges.


panning laws are not really a big deal, anyway.




so, radib, how about posting an a/b comparison for us. Or are you going to just blow smoke like everybody else who makes these claims?



.lm.
TimeableFloat ???S?e?n?d?I?n?f?o

radib
Posts: 314
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 3:11 am

Post by radib » Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:50 pm

Hu hu, give us the proof.


What if its just the playback/monitoring part of the engine that sounds bad? How to record that without great amount of preparations? When I find time to do so I´d do a parallel recording to test the recording part.


But being honest I just don´t really care. Even if it would be just a placebo. Working in Cubase is more associative, more freely, more chaotic. First it looks not as accessible as Live, but after you got used it brings up the more.
-


"after all it wouldn´t have been possible without the impossible."

radib
Posts: 314
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 3:11 am

Post by radib » Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:50 pm

pepezabala wrote:
radib wrote:People I´m sorry when that hurts you and you gotta run into those joking gesture.

(...) Or even using midi an 3rd party instruments. It sound better in its whole.
Hm, I also often noted that the midi-notes from live sound more blueish and bitter ...
radib wrote: Though it doesn´t come as surprise that most users don´t have enough taste in their ears to realize.
I probably fucked up the taste in my ears by sweet sweet music all the time. Or by smoking? I can't taste a difference between cubase and live anymore.

So what to say to a turd that tries to be funny?
-


"after all it wouldn´t have been possible without the impossible."

davec1
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:53 am
Location: Switzerland

Post by davec1 » Mon Oct 01, 2007 2:24 pm

kind of a silly question, but do you use the same bit depth and sampling frequency in both applications?

leisuremuffin
Posts: 4721
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 12:45 am
Location: New Jersey

Post by leisuremuffin » Mon Oct 01, 2007 2:45 pm

yeah, i'd like some proof.

I don't know you, so your opinion doesn't mean shit to me. If you produce some sort of evidence, it might.

If i said that my music sounds better than (insert flavor of the week producer here) would you just believe me?



.lm.
TimeableFloat ???S?e?n?d?I?n?f?o

radib
Posts: 314
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 3:11 am

Post by radib » Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:03 pm

davec1 wrote:kind of a silly question, but do you use the same bit depth and sampling frequency in both applications?
No, of course not. Why should I?


OMG
-


"after all it wouldn´t have been possible without the impossible."

radib
Posts: 314
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 3:11 am

Post by radib » Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:05 pm

leisuremuffin wrote: If i said that my music sounds better than (insert flavor of the week producer here) would you just believe me?



.lm.

If you like comparing the cars on the street with your liver inside - why not.
-


"after all it wouldn´t have been possible without the impossible."

leisuremuffin
Posts: 4721
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 12:45 am
Location: New Jersey

Post by leisuremuffin » Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:22 pm

oh, i get it, you're a complete twat.

nevermind, carry on then.


cubase is better, let's all switch.



.lm.
TimeableFloat ???S?e?n?d?I?n?f?o

Post Reply