Any Improvements In The Audio Engine Of Ableton Live 10?

[jestermgee]

What's now, guys ?

Now is present, not past nor future but existence in current state, why not yes?

[Bulemy]

What's now, guys ?

Now is present, not past nor future but existence in current state, why not yes?

it would be, perhaps, funny, if not for the fact that there have been no changes in 10 years.

[jestermgee]

Prob because there's nothing to change?

Asking "what is now guys" doesn't really strike up much of an inspiring question to take much from. What are you even asking for exactly?

[Tone Deft]

he's an old troll back for more, nothing new here, nothing to add to the conversation. have at him if you wish but it'll go nowhere.

[WAX Recording Studio - LONDON UK]

Working in both PT & LIVE daw's as a full time engineer for the last 15 + years.

I can't get away from the fact that pro tools sounds better. Clearer, more open then Ableton 11 beta (and subsequent versions).
I wish I could > not < work in Pro Tools, Ableton I feel is the company I would much rather support.

I just don't honestly feel I've ever been able to achieve the same level of mix master results in Live.

Call it differences of DAW influenced work flow, and or the actual sonics of what's happening, but as recent as today I just did another stems out of Live imported back into PT vs the mix rendered directly from Live as a stereo 2 track. The Pro tools play back from the Live stems once again sound to me Clearer, more open than the Live mix. This is plugin off and just audio. To me I would say it's a subtle difference but something I could pick out on a blind test.

Pro Tools also has a much better purpose made work flow for audio mixing, Ableton is still clumsy for this stuff. I don't know why yopu can freeze groups, deactivate and or hide tracks to free up CPU, and also easily insert plugins (or deactivate them) across the entire mixer, with a single key command. This are all deal breakers for a 'go to' one size fits all DAW as Live 11

That aside I would ONLY create beats in Live. It make Pro Tools Look and feel like it's from the 90's.

GO LIVE GO!!!!

PS: It's also not a bad practice to stem out from any DAW (live in this case) as many years later, these audio files are the equivalent to master tapes. I doubt much of the orig live sessions with plugs in would playback anything near what was intended coming back 20 years later. The audio files will likely work as long or longer than the live of any analogue tape and bear much greater resemblance to what was intended by producer

[[jur]]

You should read Live's "Audio Fact Sheet".

[fishmonkey]

To me I would say it's a subtle difference but something I could pick out on a blind test.

i suggest you do a precisely level-matched double-blind test — this needs to be repeated many times to reduce sampling error. just saying you think you could pick it on a blind test is pointless.

[WAX Recording Studio - LONDON UK]

To me I would say it's a subtle difference but something I could pick out on a blind test.

i suggest you do a precisely level-matched double-blind test — this needs to be repeated many times to reduce sampling error. just saying you think you could pick it on a blind test is pointless.

the audible difference is down to far more than sampling error as in far more audible. As I said it's down to both sonics and work flow - Try mixing in Pro Tools professionally for 15 years like and see how you feel then. I'm just speaking the truth. I've been an Ableton fan / user user since version 4

[WAX Recording Studio - LONDON UK]

You should read Live's "Audio Fact Sheet".

Thank you this is very cool and helpful...I will check it out, however As I said it's down to both sonics and work flow - Try mixing in Pro Tools professionally for 15 years like and see how you feel then. I'm just speaking the truth. I've been an Ableton fan / user user since version 4

FYI: If you record in ableton and have a low buffer (one that produces audible sample error glitches while monitoring) Guess what? Ableton records those audible glitches to disk. Pretty serious audio engine / sonics issue if you ask me. Ableton tech support confirms this is the case. That's likely not mentioned on the fact sheet ;>)

[fishmonkey]

To me I would say it's a subtle difference but something I could pick out on a blind test.

i suggest you do a precisely level-matched double-blind test — this needs to be repeated many times to reduce sampling error. just saying you think you could pick it on a blind test is pointless.

the audible difference is down to far more than sampling error as in far more audible. As I said it's down to both sonics and work flow - Try mixing in Pro Tools professionally for 15 years like and see how you feel then. I'm just speaking the truth. I've been an Ableton fan / user user since version 4

you're moving the goalposts. if you are going to make sonic claims about audio engine differences then without having done a carefully level-matched double-blind test you are simply blowing hot air, no matter how many years you've been mixing...

[fishmonkey]

You should read Live's "Audio Fact Sheet".

FYI: If you record in ableton and have a low buffer (one that produces audible sample error glitches while monitoring) Guess what? Ableton records those audible glitches to disk. Pretty serious audio engine / sonics issue if you ask me. Ableton tech support confirms this is the case. That's likely not mentioned on the fact sheet ;>)

if you hear an audible glitch then Live and your computer failed to process the required audio fast enough to fill the buffers — why would you expect the audio recorded to disk to not also be glitched? for that to be the case Live would need to be processing a second non-real-time audio stream whenever it was playing.

[Mark Williams]

You should read Live's "Audio Fact Sheet".

Thank you this is very cool and helpful...I will check it out, however As I said it's down to both sonics and work flow - Try mixing in Pro Tools professionally for 15 years like and see how you feel then. I'm just speaking the truth. I've been an Ableton fan / user user since version 4

FYI: If you record in ableton and have a low buffer (one that produces audible sample error glitches while monitoring) Guess what? Ableton records those audible glitches to disk. Pretty serious audio engine / sonics issue if you ask me. Ableton tech support confirms this is the case. That's likely not mentioned on the fact sheet ;>)

These posts you make, show to me, that you are truely spewing out some real BS here. Its quite obvious to all concerned, that if you have glitches on a low buffer, you would also expect it to show in the recording of that, as others have also pointed out to you. On your previous posts, it has already been disproven that DAWS sound different. your ears are fooling you.

[fishmonkey]

To me I would say it's a subtle difference but something I could pick out on a blind test.

i suggest you do a precisely level-matched double-blind test — this needs to be repeated many times to reduce sampling error. just saying you think you could pick it on a blind test is pointless.

the audible difference is down to far more than sampling error as in far more audible. As I said it's down to both sonics and work flow - Try mixing in Pro Tools professionally for 15 years like and see how you feel then. I'm just speaking the truth. I've been an Ableton fan / user user since version 4

i just watched this video, which is an excellent and stark example of why level-matched comparisons are essential. it's well worth a watch for anyone doing music production:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YN4l5k1kC-k