Charlie May from Spooky bags the Ableton Sound Engine

[ethios4]

it also makes me think that Sasha is a dimwit that doesn't know how to use Live.

Well, he does always have the help window open!

[gomi]

In Computer Music 142 Charlie May of Spooky, who works with Sasha, notes that he has to bounce everythin out of Ableton Live and bring it into logic because "the summing engine just doesn't sound as good" This is like computer music mag is from August 2009 and is the drum and bass special.

You have to admit a lot of pros make this complaint. It's like non stop, almost makes you wonder.

most people wont be able to hear the difference in the summing until they are in a very good room with
very very good equipment.


your home studio, you can't tell.


truth.


that said, when i was working in a post production place with multiple Protools HD rigs in perfectly tuned
rooms the stuff out of protools sounds a LOT better then straight out of Live.. and this is through the
SAME gear..


to each his own.

[Gab]

In Computer Music 142 Charlie May of Spooky, who works with Sasha, notes that he has to bounce everythin out of Ableton Live and bring it into logic because "the summing engine just doesn't sound as good" This is like computer music mag is from August 2009 and is the drum and bass special.

You have to admit a lot of pros make this complaint. It's like non stop, almost makes you wonder.

It's called a running gag.

[leedsquietman]

It's not the same gear. Were you running Live through a Digidesign audio interface ?? (not likely, but in the event you were, digi's DAC drivers are totally optimized for Protools and not for anything else and can't compare to core audio drivers or ASIO drivers on a 3rd party interface). As we all know there are very few hardware choices to run a digidesign system through as their hardware is proprietary.

Did they use no plugins in protools ? Did they use no plugins in Live (including EQ8 and things of that manner). Were the pan laws and the gain levels set to match exactly. This is all very unlikely, because the chances are, people brought their Live mixes to run through a PTHD system and take advantage of the plugins they have for PTHD in TDM (especially) format, not to try and perform a summing test !!!!!! Therefore, yes, the Protools mix should sound better in those conditions, given it's the 'AFTER' in a 'BEFORE' and 'AFTER' test.

Also, 99% of studio engineers know how to run Protools and did extensive courses in it. How many studio engineers know Live inside out ?? Many studios which have Reason, Live, FL Studio or whatever in conjunction to Protools barely know how to run this software, they're just looking to rewire or export files from it. There is no way to run a proper Protools vs Live test because of Digidesign requiring their own interfaces and/or their proprietary DAC driver which is only optimized for that system, so people just go with the 'industry standard for audio sounds better, etc'. Posts like this just add to the gossip and rumours among the lemmings out there who don't know Live but who all agree it sounds crap because 'xyz' engineer (trained in Protools, spent 3 hours one afternoon during a dry spell for the studio clicking around on some buttons like a chimpanzee in Live before pronouncing this).

[xyandrej]

Hi mlee_aus,

youre are absolutely right. i just posted something about the sound engine before you but I guess some idiots around here
just don`t get it!

but thats what makes a pro!

I am doing the same, taking the individual tracks and bounce it down in sonar producer. you can definetly hear the difference!

check my last post

cheers
Andrej

[bosonHavoc]

i think this is a job for myth busters!!

[gomi]

Same wave files in live.
Same wave files in protools.
Both coming out of the HD 192 into the Blue Skies.
Room calibrated. etc etc.. this is a pro facility I used to work in as their digital audio tech.
I didn't test live as a rewire slave though, I totally should have done that.



The panning laws are different yes.
but so is the summing.

PT HD uses a 48 bit engine.

Live uses a 64 bit (what???)

here is some overly technical data for you.

http://akmedia.digidesign.com/support/d ... _26688.pdf
and the live info is in the document pdf under the Audio Fact Sheet.

I am not saying one is better then the other, but they are both DIFFERENT.
Which leads people to start saying things like "it sucks" or "its bad"
It's neither, it's just different.

It's not the same gear. Were you running Live through a Digidesign audio interface ?? (not likely, but in the event you were, digi's DAC drivers are totally optimized for Protools and not for anything else and can't compare to core audio drivers or ASIO drivers on a 3rd party interface). As we all know there are very few hardware choices to run a digidesign system through as their hardware is proprietary.

Did they use no plugins in protools ? Did they use no plugins in Live (including EQ8 and things of that manner). Were the pan laws and the gain levels set to match exactly. This is all very unlikely, because the chances are, people brought their Live mixes to run through a PTHD system and take advantage of the plugins they have for PTHD in TDM (especially) format, not to try and perform a summing test !!!!!! Therefore, yes, the Protools mix should sound better in those conditions, given it's the 'AFTER' in a 'BEFORE' and 'AFTER' test.

Also, 99% of studio engineers know how to run Protools and did extensive courses in it. How many studio engineers know Live inside out ?? Many studios which have Reason, Live, FL Studio or whatever in conjunction to Protools barely know how to run this software, they're just looking to rewire or export files from it. There is no way to run a proper Protools vs Live test because of Digidesign requiring their own interfaces and/or their proprietary DAC driver which is only optimized for that system, so people just go with the 'industry standard for audio sounds better, etc'. Posts like this just add to the gossip and rumours among the lemmings out there who don't know Live but who all agree it sounds crap because 'xyz' engineer (trained in Protools, spent 3 hours one afternoon during a dry spell for the studio clicking around on some buttons like a chimpanzee in Live before pronouncing this).

[bosonHavoc]

done and done..
myth busters will solve this... (prolly not but ihad fun for 30 seconds )
http://community.discovery.com/eve/foru ... 5119806301

[Tone Deft]

i think this is a job for myth busters!!

oh man, I dunno about that. it's frustrating enough watching them fumble with a voltmeter, I shudder to think what they'd do with audio test gear.

[gomi]

i think this is a job for myth busters!!

oh man, I dunno about that. it's frustrating enough watching them fumble with a voltmeter, I shudder to think what they'd do with audio test gear.

probably blow it up, or light it on fire.

[bosonHavoc]

i think this is a job for myth busters!!

oh man, I dunno about that. it's frustrating enough watching them fumble with a voltmeter, I shudder to think what they'd do with audio test gear.

probably blow it up, or light it on fire.

it will be entertaining non the less

[leedsquietman]

The HD 192 would require use of a DAC driver in Live, not core audio or ASIO.

The DAC driver is less than optimal for anything non Protools.

Therefore, that's one handicap before you even consider anything else. As you rightly point out, PTHD has fixed point float as opposed to floating point, but typically that is a miniscule differential on most program material, typically something which shows up more on a spectograph than is audible.

I'd like to see what people would think of Live's audio if it was run through a Core Audio driver into a Prism Orpheus or Metric Halo ULN-8 and compare that to the PTHD rig into an HD192 in a blind test.

I've worked in studios with PTHD, Logic and Nuendo/Cubase and could not tell the difference between any of them. Admittedly, I've only used Live at home, but my home studio has reasonable gear and has acoustic treatment and it doesn't sound any different to Cubase, Logic or other things I've tested at home against it in summing tests and renders (PTHD rig at home would be cool mind).

[rbmonosylabik]

Meh.

I'm off to make some badly summed music.

[morbid]

I like the audio engine on octamed on my amiga

I done some tests an stuff and it turns out it sounds wicked

So theres the proof.

I did some phase cancellation stuff but lost the files but it does sound wicked alright

[fisto]

well guys, it actually is true. The Ableton sound-engine is really bad.
Long time i didn't want it to be true, but then i tried it for myself.
I've tested Live vs Reaper3. I've routed live to reaper via rearoute(a reaper thing, with which you can route things between audio-programms), no exporting, and it really sounded clearer, not that typical abby-mudyness.
And that only through the summing in reaper, cause the tracks were played from live.

2nd test i did:
Ten 5-min-wave-files, all with the same instance of a very good eq. Reaper had about 20% CPU-consumption and Live had 80% and was starting to hang and get quite un-responsive for working fluidly. At that moment I thought: "Thats it, Im switching for mixing".

Also load Kore2 in Live and load it in Reaper. See the difference in loading time and in the CPU-use.
Test it out. you can try it for free, cause there is an uncrippled version on the website (only 4MB). And the price is also very cool: 60 dollars for the non-commercial license which means, if you earn less than 200.000 dollars per year with music, you can get it for that 60 bucks.

Love to see that there are people who just like to write great apps and don't cash for software which really doesn't work as it should. Don't get me wrong i love Live, but it's NOT FOR MIXING. It's an instrument and a writing tool.

Of course a lot won't admit that live actually sounds not so good as other daws, because they don't want to learn a real daw.

Dont shout at me, test it out for yourself!