randyh wrote:And from the dude who's blue in the face from arguing his side. What a douche.
sorry, should have read more carefully.
um ... point being, yes adam did a summing bus test. no i didnt catch it either
.
sound quality: live vs. logic
um ... point being, yes adam did a summing bus test. no i didnt catch it either
.
--
NEW SPECS: Athlon 4200+ dual; A8N-SLI m/b; Win XP Home SP2; 1 GB RAM; 2x 7200 RPM HDD: 1 internal, 1 Firewire 800 (Firewire is project data drive); M-Audio Triggerfinger
josh 'vonster' von; tracks and sets
http://www.joshvon.com
NEW SPECS: Athlon 4200+ dual; A8N-SLI m/b; Win XP Home SP2; 1 GB RAM; 2x 7200 RPM HDD: 1 internal, 1 Firewire 800 (Firewire is project data drive); M-Audio Triggerfinger
josh 'vonster' von; tracks and sets
http://www.joshvon.com
got it, you hoosier :pAdamJay wrote:they don't call them St. Lunatics for a reason or anything
its no big deal that he didn't realize that but i want people to know that YES, this IS a test between the two summing busses.
I have to throw in here that I'm not totally with you on your frequency analyzer tests. I would think those plugs would be doing "rough math" to give you a ballpark picture at the least possible cpu usage. Besides, did you compensate for the gain difference?AdamJay wrote: If it were not, then the 2 spectral analysis' from Waves PAZ that i showed on Page 3 would be totally 100% identical. We SEE some deviations, but do we HEAR deviations? No. And there are deviations in the Logic spectrum that favor Live, as there are ones that favor Logic as well. So there is no "winner". There is no "superior". You can't say Logic is superior because it has better detail at 16000hz, because Live has better detail at 750hz.
If the gain was compensated for and you ran like 5 instances on each track and they ALL looked identical, then that might be meaningful. I'll be glad to do it when I get home from work.
-r
Master of the Interweb
(I was making fun of myself for going on and on without fully understanding what was done originally. Didn't want anyone to think I was pointing a finger at anyone but myself)supster wrote:randyh wrote:And from the dude who's blue in the face from arguing his side. What a douche.
sorry, should have read more carefully.
um ... point being, yes adam did a summing bus test. no i didnt catch it either
.
Master of the Interweb
i did compensate for gain, sorry i did not mention that.
i ran both files through their own PAZ analyzers about 7 or 8 times.
the lines on the graph are freezing the highest peaks of those frequencies.
zoomed out to fit it all in the PAZ window.
i ran PAZ in DSP Quattro btw.
and they certainly aren't running at least possible CPU usage
ever used Waves PAZ before? they should rename it to Waves Heifer.
i ran both files through their own PAZ analyzers about 7 or 8 times.
the lines on the graph are freezing the highest peaks of those frequencies.
zoomed out to fit it all in the PAZ window.
i ran PAZ in DSP Quattro btw.
and they certainly aren't running at least possible CPU usage
ever used Waves PAZ before? they should rename it to Waves Heifer.
I take back what I said about the rough math stuff. I understand basic math but not FFT or any of that advanced stuff so I shouldn't talk like I do.AdamJay wrote:i did compensate for gain, sorry i did not mention that.
i ran both files through their own PAZ analyzers about 7 or 8 times.
the lines on the graph are freezing the highest peaks of those frequencies.
zoomed out to fit it all in the PAZ window.
i ran PAZ in DSP Quattro btw.
and they certainly aren't running at least possible CPU usage
ever used Waves PAZ before? they should rename it to Waves Heifer.
Regardless, I'm still going to trust my phase tests and my ears over PAZ. But what I meant was that I'd want to see several instances running on each track to make sure they ALL get the same picture. I'll do it with SPAN tonight and see what I come up with.
-r
Master of the Interweb
this reminds me of talking to shop assistants - not trying to be rude here
when i went to a shop to make house music over 10 years ago the assistant tried to sell me a 4 trk recorder and sr16 - he was meant to be the teky - luckily i knew he was wrong
later people tried to sell me a supernova saying it was superior to access virus. i choose the virus.
so what i'm saying is live sounds diff. to other applications and my ears tell me that, and no i'm not getting influenced by the colors on the screen etc. me and a whole load of friends agree the diff, we are not scientists and the numbers are like double dutch to me. but we all agree its diff sounding to others.
however i m not trying to change anyones opinion, but take older samplers - akai/roland both had same sample rates but the roland had a better sound - without any filtres or post prod. it produced a diff sound to the akai. i couldnt dispute the diff and nor with comparisons here.
nuendo and logic sound entirely diff.....likewise live has a unique sound to it.
over and out
i do respect others opionions and am reallly interested to hear them as i'm still forming my opinions and as i talk i am crossing files back and forth from nuendo and live to a & b them
when i went to a shop to make house music over 10 years ago the assistant tried to sell me a 4 trk recorder and sr16 - he was meant to be the teky - luckily i knew he was wrong
later people tried to sell me a supernova saying it was superior to access virus. i choose the virus.
so what i'm saying is live sounds diff. to other applications and my ears tell me that, and no i'm not getting influenced by the colors on the screen etc. me and a whole load of friends agree the diff, we are not scientists and the numbers are like double dutch to me. but we all agree its diff sounding to others.
however i m not trying to change anyones opinion, but take older samplers - akai/roland both had same sample rates but the roland had a better sound - without any filtres or post prod. it produced a diff sound to the akai. i couldnt dispute the diff and nor with comparisons here.
nuendo and logic sound entirely diff.....likewise live has a unique sound to it.
over and out
i do respect others opionions and am reallly interested to hear them as i'm still forming my opinions and as i talk i am crossing files back and forth from nuendo and live to a & b them
god i'm cool and u r not
-
dj metronome
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:12 pm
I have absolutley no doubts that you get completely different sounds out of different programs. But it has nothing to do with the program doing "magic" to the sound and everything to do with how you use the program. What we're proving is that it's you (the user), not the program. By all means use the program that YOU get a better sound out of. But don't mix subjective, random, unscientific experiences with a direct A/B comparison. If you want to make a point, post some waves like AdamJay.oblong wrote:this reminds me of talking to shop assistants - not trying to be rude here
when i went to a shop to make house music over 10 years ago the assistant tried to sell me a 4 trk recorder and sr16 - he was meant to be the teky - luckily i knew he was wrong
later people tried to sell me a supernova saying it was superior to access virus. i choose the virus.
so what i'm saying is live sounds diff. to other applications and my ears tell me that, and no i'm not getting influenced by the colors on the screen etc. me and a whole load of friends agree the diff, we are not scientists and the numbers are like double dutch to me. but we all agree its diff sounding to others.
however i m not trying to change anyones opinion, but take older samplers - akai/roland both had same sample rates but the roland had a better sound - without any filtres or post prod. it produced a diff sound to the akai. i couldnt dispute the diff and nor with comparisons here.
nuendo and logic sound entirely diff.....likewise live has a unique sound to it.
over and out
i do respect others opionions and am reallly interested to hear them as i'm still forming my opinions and as i talk i am crossing files back and forth from nuendo and live to a & b them
It's stuff like this that makes this topic just go round and round and round and round.
-r
Master of the Interweb
randyh just hit it right on the head.
if you are getting a better sound with Nuendo (or any other DAW) rather than with Live
its not because Live has an inferior mixing buss, its because YOU as a writer and producer get a better sound when you are working in the Nuendo environment rather than the Live environment.
Its all on YOU. and there's nothing wrong with that, just don't blame it entirely on the software.
I personally get a better sound in Live than in any other software application or with any combination of hardware. That does not mean that Live is a superior application. It just means for me it works the best. It could be that i'm more enthusiastic about my music in Live than elsewhere because of the realtime workflow. It could be that i didn't have to drop $999 into Logic Pro to be able to replace my hardware. And it could be that my ears have just developed alot more since using Live.
No matter what, for me, its Live that gives me the best package. Workflow, Intuitiveness, Simplicity, Comfort, and Sound Quality. In no particular order.
Sometimes it just takes hearing someone get great results with a tool you are or were skeptical about. I know the first time i heard Reason 1.0, my friend Devlin sold off all his gear because he got so much more done with Reason. It sounded as good as his old setup (mixing through a Behringer mixer), and that told me ya know what - Reason is a viable solution. For alot of people it was hearing Liam Howlett use Reason on a Prodigy album to know that (regardless of protools) it was a viable solution.
Just a few days ago, at the Indy Live User Group meeting, Rahlo heard and saw that i don't need anything besides Live 4 (and a couple choice plugins, free and commercial) and some good EQing to achieve a high level of production quality. And now he sees no need for Pro Tools.
Thus, i think the best thing we can do to refute all of these baseless claims that the Live 4 mixing buss is inferior to other bloated DAWs is to simply produce the best music we can with Live 4 and let the music and production speak for itself. I just completed a full length 2x12" album co-produced with Brian Kage. We collaborated on every track via FTP, uploading back and forth .als and sounds folders. Him living in Detroit and me living 4.5 hours away in Indy could not have done this without Live. Resampling softsynths that he owns and i do not, being able to make minor eq adjustments and share them within 3 minutes over 350 miles away, and finishing the entire album in just a couple months would not have happened without Live. And we WILL be making sure anyone interested in this album knows that it was done entirely in Live. We owe it to the Abletons to let people know this, because without Ableton we would still be working on this album.
if you are getting a better sound with Nuendo (or any other DAW) rather than with Live
its not because Live has an inferior mixing buss, its because YOU as a writer and producer get a better sound when you are working in the Nuendo environment rather than the Live environment.
Its all on YOU. and there's nothing wrong with that, just don't blame it entirely on the software.
I personally get a better sound in Live than in any other software application or with any combination of hardware. That does not mean that Live is a superior application. It just means for me it works the best. It could be that i'm more enthusiastic about my music in Live than elsewhere because of the realtime workflow. It could be that i didn't have to drop $999 into Logic Pro to be able to replace my hardware. And it could be that my ears have just developed alot more since using Live.
No matter what, for me, its Live that gives me the best package. Workflow, Intuitiveness, Simplicity, Comfort, and Sound Quality. In no particular order.
Sometimes it just takes hearing someone get great results with a tool you are or were skeptical about. I know the first time i heard Reason 1.0, my friend Devlin sold off all his gear because he got so much more done with Reason. It sounded as good as his old setup (mixing through a Behringer mixer), and that told me ya know what - Reason is a viable solution. For alot of people it was hearing Liam Howlett use Reason on a Prodigy album to know that (regardless of protools) it was a viable solution.
Just a few days ago, at the Indy Live User Group meeting, Rahlo heard and saw that i don't need anything besides Live 4 (and a couple choice plugins, free and commercial) and some good EQing to achieve a high level of production quality. And now he sees no need for Pro Tools.
Thus, i think the best thing we can do to refute all of these baseless claims that the Live 4 mixing buss is inferior to other bloated DAWs is to simply produce the best music we can with Live 4 and let the music and production speak for itself. I just completed a full length 2x12" album co-produced with Brian Kage. We collaborated on every track via FTP, uploading back and forth .als and sounds folders. Him living in Detroit and me living 4.5 hours away in Indy could not have done this without Live. Resampling softsynths that he owns and i do not, being able to make minor eq adjustments and share them within 3 minutes over 350 miles away, and finishing the entire album in just a couple months would not have happened without Live. And we WILL be making sure anyone interested in this album knows that it was done entirely in Live. We owe it to the Abletons to let people know this, because without Ableton we would still be working on this album.
this is something - do you know why this happens adam j ?
k.
1.use live, standalone - sounds great
2.hook it to nuendo coming through nuendos outputs and it uses nuendos engine - sounds completely different
y ? cause nuendo uses diff engine than lives
for the record live alone stands better than live synced using nuendo outputs
k.
1.use live, standalone - sounds great
2.hook it to nuendo coming through nuendos outputs and it uses nuendos engine - sounds completely different
y ? cause nuendo uses diff engine than lives
for the record live alone stands better than live synced using nuendo outputs
god i'm cool and u r not
From memory..... When I worked with the speaker manufacture guy....
I think he said a human can't percieve less than a 3db change in
frequency response over a 5hz range or something along those lines.
So anything we were hearing on good monitors was just gain.....
edit: 3 shoulds high.... it may have been anything under 2db.
-Ben
I think he said a human can't percieve less than a 3db change in
frequency response over a 5hz range or something along those lines.
So anything we were hearing on good monitors was just gain.....
edit: 3 shoulds high.... it may have been anything under 2db.
-Ben
Re: bummer
did you read this entire thread?neuronaut wrote:Looks like Live sounds worse than Logic and the only defense anyone can offer is; well, crap ain't so bad.
The biggest bummer is I'd have to move to Mac again just to use Logic. Ug!