Live's audio engine less effective than Pro-Tools or Logic?

[tfsctfsc]

Hi everyone.

I'd like to know your opinion about this. I heard a few times people say that Live is mainly meant to be used in live situations and that the audio engine is not as effective as the one of Pro-Tools or Logic. These people said a 30 tracks mix sounded better defined on Pro-Tools or Logic than on Live. What do you think? Is there really a difference?

Thx

Jakub

[nebulae]

27.96%

[Gab]

There's a comprehensive pile of information on the subject here.

[twisted-space]

Live should only ever be used live, why do you think they called it Live? If it was meant to be used in the studio, they would have called it Ableton Studio wouldn't they?

[nebulae]

[Linear Phase]

I hear OS x Lion is a disaster for audio production, and that Apple has dropped the price of Logic to $200.. Pro Tools HD Systems are probably on their way out. Cubase/Nuendo still seem pretty relevant to me, and truth be known, their are some audio editing things that can be done is Cubase that Ableton really should be incorporating into v9.

I do think all daws sound different. I know a lot of people don't. I think I hear different qualities from different daws. That's just that.

But also think that, "sound quality," is all relative. You know what I mean, billy jean? You can take Justine Bieba, through her through Pro Tools, and she'll sound great. Likewise, you can grab some SM57s, your iphone loaded with Amplitube, and go get a banging album out of the New York Philharmonic

[UltimateOutsider]

I'd like to know your opinion about this. I heard a few times people say that Live is mainly meant to be used in live situations and that the audio engine is not as effective as the one of Pro-Tools or Logic. These people said a 30 tracks mix sounded better defined on Pro-Tools or Logic than on Live. What do you think? Is there really a difference?

You're not getting a straight answer because it's pretty much been proven that all major DAWs sound alike, given the same signal path and settings. Any time someone claims to find evidence that Live "sounds worse" than other DAWs, it inevitably turns out to be a difference in hardware or recording settings, not the DAW itself.

This is actually a really good thing, of course. It means that when deciding which DAW to work with, you can base your decision purely on which one has the most attractive workflow, and not worry that you're sacrificing sound quality for ease of use.

[mharris]

Processing digital audio and in particular, summing together two or more audio signals is actually a very straight forward process. It is an operation as simple as 1+1=2. As you can see, there is very little scope to introduce errors and even less scope to improve the process in the search for a "better sounding" audio engine.

Because DSP comes down to simple mathematics, it is very easy to write automated tests to verify that the software performs exactly as it should. There is no subjectivity or opinion involved, it is either correct or its not.

All the DAW manufacturers will have a suite of these automated tests that they will run regularly during development phases and again before any software is released. This is the reason why, given the same input and processing the rendered output form different DAWS will be pretty much bit-for-bit identical.

Where things do get interesting is when you consider the variety and quality of the plug-ins that are included with a DAW. This is where you will see a difference. An important point to remember is that many for the plug-ins included with Live are optimised for live performance. However, as soon as you start to consider third-party plug-ins it makes no difference which DAW you use.

[pencilrocket]

Hi everyone.

I'd like to know your opinion about this. I heard a few times people say that Live is mainly meant to be used in live situations and that the audio engine is not as effective as the one of Pro-Tools or Logic. These people said a 30 tracks mix sounded better defined on Pro-Tools or Logic than on Live. What do you think? Is there really a difference?

Thx

Jakub

Live runs with less dropout of audio stream. It means it uses more resource of the computer. If you call less CPU usage 'effective' Live is not as effective as the other hosts.

[H20nly]

it really all depends on your setup. if you have a lot of additional components that cost a lot of money it could make your performance and fuel efficiency increase but typically by leaving everything the way it was turned out by the factory you will be saving in the long run. it helps maintain the warranty and keeps your insurance from going up.

[Ub373NNN]

logic is for the best because franzferdinand,coldplays,the killers and many most use logic and they can be profesionals.
http://www.apple.com/logicpro/in-action/

[pencilrocket]

Logic rules. Logic is the best. Logic is superior to anything. Becasue it's apple. Think different.

[simpli.cissimus]

Studio One rules the future...

Even some hardcore Live experts use it now.

[ninox_rufa]

You're not getting a straight answer because it's pretty much been proven that all major DAWs sound alike, given the same signal path and settings. Any time someone claims to find evidence that Live "sounds worse" than other DAWs, it inevitably turns out to be a difference in hardware or recording settings, not the DAW itself.

...as soon as you start to consider third-party plug-ins it makes no difference which DAW you use.

As much as I hate to flog this horse again...
Claiming that all DAWs sound the same is just as much nonsense as claiming that Live has a bad summing engine. Live does sound different but THE reason is that syncing to midi clock of plugins and devices is not adjusted in line with delay compensation. That and the fact that automation is not delay compensated. This may not make a difference in the music you make but it makes a huge difference for some styles of music.

End of story.

[ttilberg]

I don't have experience to know about the digital summing of audio, and Ninox_Rufa's comment above.

However, this seems extremely obvious:

Where things do get interesting is when you consider the variety and quality of the plug-ins that are included with a DAW. This is where you will see a difference. An important point to remember is that many for the plug-ins included with Live are optimised for live performance. However, as soon as you start to consider third-party plug-ins it makes no difference which DAW you use.

I think often when people are asking about DAW sound quality, they are referring to the overall package, not just how 10 24/96 wavs on various channels come out of the master, absolutely everything else being equal.

I'm of the camp that of course the different DAWs sound different by themselves. They all use different tools, different algorithms to calculate the math for effects and whatnot, etc. Again, I'm not exclusively looking at "adding two channels of audio together" -- I'm talking about the results you obtain by making music in Ableton Live.

Whether Live's is BETTER or NOT than any other I feel is similar to saying "Chip and Mint Ice Cream is better than Rocky Road (which of course it is)."

Many people say Analog synths are always better than digital synths, wheras folks like Dada Life would strongly disagree.

Of course, if you use external VSTs for everything, the differences likely become immensely more subtle, if it all.