Audio Engine Test - Live Versus Pro Tools Versus Logic

[Khazul]

regarding the protools 48 bit.. of cause its just the internal bit width and the output gets dithred down to 24 bits..
and with live we have 32 bit float without any dithering... right? so what happens when we listen to this output with 24 bid DA converters?

You missed the point with PT - the dithering down to 24 bit (AFAIK) happens *between every* plugin not just at the audio interface/file export - that would generally have a greater cumulative effect upon calculation correctness then simply rounding the output to 24 bit.

However continuous dithering will add shaped noise and that in itself may contribute to a phsycho-accoustic perceived 'nicer' sound. You could of course just add noise in any floating point DAW and end up with something cosier still - mix in some very low level analog hiss sampled from a tape machine or an old hi-fi, noisey mic input or whatever works.

[3phase]

regarding the protools 48 bit.. of cause its just the internal bit width and the output gets dithred down to 24 bits..
and with live we have 32 bit float without any dithering... right? so what happens when we listen to this output with 24 bid DA converters?

You missed the point with PT - the dithering down to 24 bit (AFAIK) happens *between every* plugin not just at the audio interface/file export - that would generally have a greater cumulative effect upon calculation correctness then simply rounding the output to 24 bit.

However continuous dithering will add shaped noise and that in itself may contribute to a phsycho-accoustic perceived 'nicer' sound. You could of course just add noise in any floating point DAW and end up with something cosier still - mix in some very low level analog hiss sampled from a tape machine or an old hi-fi, noisey mic input or whatever works.

i mainly use analog soundsources..there is no need to add arteficial noise- its rather like in the good ol days that you have to work hard to keep it in reasonable amounts..

[Palmer Eldritch]

... but i guess you know that a null test dont says too much because the artefacts the can effekt the sound badly might be unaudible on normal listenig levels..

I think besides me also other would say:

nonsense.

- Sorry Robert to take advantage of your name

The null test shows the absolute difference between two sound events in the digital domain. This is simple math, +1 + -1 is Zero in every universe I know. With Lives Spectrum Analyzer you can see differences down to around -179 dB. (the last two bits of 32 bits).

I doubt that there will be any difference in the last bit and I doubt that (also an excellent) 24 bit DA converter could make this hearable.

[3phase]

... but i guess you know that a null test dont says too much because the artefacts the can effekt the sound badly might be unaudible on normal listenig levels..

I think besides me also other would say:

nonsense.

- Sorry Robert to take advantage of your name

The null test shows the absolute difference between two sound events in the digital domain. This is simple math, +1 + -1 is Zero in every universe I know. With Lives Spectrum Analyzer you can see differences down to around -179 dB. (the last two bits of 32 bits).

I doubt that there will be any difference in the last bit and I doubt that (also an excellent) 24 bit DA converter could make this hearable.

come on..
When you have measured that the result is down to -179db ok... but when its only -100db its not really canceling itself out..

Therfore most null tests performed by people are the nonsense itself when you dont acompanie them with measurements...

Epecially when they are taken to prove qualitys that are not related to the main issue...they usually dont say anything about what happens in the mix... what is the most crucial area since the beginning of digital audio..

remember the protools discussion in the later 90´s? when people claimed that the mix quality got reduced on higher track counts? and exactly the same discussion like the one regardings lives sound quality started?

just the same type of discussion.."impossible because digital audio cant fail " on the one side.. "but we hear that it sounds shit and trust our ears " on the other side..
Like allways in the history of audio technology the ear fraction won and digidesign had to upgrade theire product..

When people hear some problems they are usually there.. and only after you adapt your measuring protocols acording to theire findings you can measure and explain the phenomen.
Rarely measurements lead to a problem before somebody has spoted them with the ear.
The ear is the best trouble shooting device for audio.

Its just difficult to get a grasp on the problems when they are not consistant.. like the old protools problem..

it needed a while to get the track count into the equation and that explained why some people got the problem and others not..calling each other nonsense talkers before..

[3phase]

[
The null test shows the absolute difference between two sound events in the digital domain. This is simple math, +1 + -1 is Zero in every universe I know. With Lives Spectrum Analyzer you can see differences down to around -179 dB. (the last two bits of 32 bits).

that also indicates that you done your null test in life itself..

in science that is actually a false test when you use the test objekt to measure the results.. because an error might cancel itself out...

[invol]

i dont see a test valid that works with virtual sample instruments..

But isn't that how most people on this forum make music? I said at the outset of my post, that I realize these results do not account for audio only projects.

[invol]

what a bullshit statement.. logic is a bit hotter.. pfff

Did I say better? Worse? No, just hotter. The same setup yielded a higher peak and higher average. If you think this test was BS, fine, do one yourself.

[invol]

regarding the protools 48 bit.. of cause its just the internal bit width and the output gets dithred down to 24 bits..

and with live we have 32 bit float without any dithering... right? so what happens when we listen to this output with 24 bid DA converters?

Btw, only Pro Tools HD is 48bit fixed. PT LE and 9, etc are also 32 bit float.

[invol]

that could be even good for live because it likes to clip internaly much earlier than the meters suggest

Could not confirm
Internal bus overhead in live (8) is about 70dB (about 12bit)
Please describe a test scenario where you examine this behavior.

cheers palmer

there is no indication of intersample peaks..when you connect a meter that shows them you will realize that an all green bargraph dont means absolutly no clippings.. you need to have at least 2 db´s saftey

SSL makes a free meter plug that shows intersample peaks. Though, those only make a difference with cheap DACs, and - 0.3 dB FS is enough for all but the worst of them.

[invol]

a complex mix has more chance to be quick out of sync and phased,especially with high latency 3rd party,
with automations, modulation and sync timing drifts due to dpc behaviour in ableton.
this is not a legend, is fairly reproductible and daily experienced by mainy and as a huge impact on final 'quality',
much more than any potential float rounding.

users reports logic and Pt are tighter and more accurate relating compensation. i cannot confirm as i don't own logic or pt,
but i wouldn't be surprised most might prefer logic or pt sound cause of this.

at least this has been proven logic compensate midi clock timing info. live don't.

edit: if you have time for a secon test, i would love to see a PDC comparaison between the 3 daws.
_take a very high latency plug (ie Fabfilter ProQ in linear phase mode is a very good challenger).
_add a new vst after it, ie simple gain stage.
then automate this gain placed after the vst, and try to modulate something in sync (ie cut volume of 1rst and 3rd beat,
by cutting in sync with reference grid.
_post the 3 result files.

i might be wrong, but im pretty sure the difference will be much, much more noticeable..

I think you may be onto something here. If I have time I will try something related to Delay Compensation, though it might be a few weeks, or months, before I do. Anyone else want to have a stab at it? All the files you get you going are available via link in initial post.

[3phase]

i dont see a test valid that works with virtual sample instruments..

But isn't that how most people on this forum make music? I said at the outset of my post, that I realize these results do not account for audio only projects.

All projekts are audio only projekts in the end.. a daw should be able to handle all kinds of materials.. ableton

But i dont want to say that live cant do that.. actually i am doing an electronic mix wright now where the brown henke dither works beautifully. But i think to transfer that in stems to logic or the harrison/adour thing to keep that state. because doing a bounce of that and put it back in the mix seems risky after the last weeks experiance..I will try to do the projekt in 2 daws in parallel.. maybe i know more after that.

But for the question which daw does it best or wether there are differences between daw´s or not, the test material needs to be very well recorded acoustical attractions..

In the early 90´s there was still the discussion analog tape versus digital revolution..
And I was able to witness a shootout between the last step in the evolution of tape machines.. a studer a820 with dolby SR versus various dat recorders and AD converters..
The test sound was an expensiv handhammered ride cymbal played with a soft mallet very softly.. recording level? low.. maybe -50-60? whatever.. 1:1 level on the big studio monitors, it really sounded almost like being in the recording room ..

This signal gave the digital machines something to chew... With the Studer it sounded 1:1 exactly like we heard it from the mike... no noise..nothing.. just the same..what you hear is what you get...
The dat and converters? uhhhh...only the very expensiv sony pcm xy was able to give at least an idea of the original event, but was a cheap cymbal now..not a hand hammered with its silvery tones..and the mallet was a hard one now...
the other dats and converters ?..super mario brother game sound fx...
Was rather digistroying... I havent expected the cheaper digis to be that bad before the test.

ok ..converters are better now.. i just gave this example to show what kind of signals would be necessary to really test the reality factor...neutral sound statements need a reference..
So hand played cymbals over expensive mikes and acoustic bass-- some drums.. with room information in the recording How do they mix?.. no voice..voices steal attention and brain capacity..

I would like to hear such a test one day.. and its possible that live is better there than i think.. was only able to test it with my analog synth recordings sofar..what are demanding signals aswell..but no real reference, a synth can be any sound and the ableton sound might just dont meet my taste..but you know how a handhammred cymbal is supposed to sound so its easier to discuss when something is missing there.

whatever.. more in the 2012 ablton sound myths discussion round

[invol]

But for the question which daw does it best or wether there are differences between daw´s or not, the test material needs to be very well recorded acoustical attractions..

I actually totally agree with you on that point. I decided to do this test for myself as much as anyone, and I found the results to be very interesting. To do a "real" real-world test would involve more time than I have and more equipment and studio space than I can afford. At the end of the day, I use whichever DAW is best suited to the task at hand. I assume everyone else pretty much does the same.

Cheers,
Brian

[virtualboy]

I think this guy have a good point.

http://www.minzmusic.net/blog/archive/2 ... umming-bus

and

http://www.minzmusic.net/blog/archive/2 ... leton-live

Have a good day

[just_in]

Download Files Here 38.5MB

The A file is about half the size of the other two. Looks like 16 bit audio in a 24 bit container.

[Forge.]

i dont see a test valid that works with virtual sample instruments.. that what is eaten away in lives mixing process are details in the room information of the tracks.. therefor with sampleinstruments that dont hold such information there cant get anything lost.

Such a test with a classical multritrack recording of a string quarted for example .. or a jazz combo would be more valid..

..

eh??? if anything, just audio is completely pointless.... no matter what paranoid delusions you are on, pure audio recordings is the one thing that wont show any difference, even in null tests, if everything is at exactly the same level and there is no warping/FX/Automation.

The only things that are in any way likely to affect the quality between them is PDC and automation.

pan laws as well if they are not considered in the test, but in reality just comparing simple audio files is not difficult and if they are properly compared they are not going to be any different, and I look forward to you proving otherwise.