Live Sound Quality - Is it Pro?

eyeknow · Post by **eyeknow** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 11:25 am

metaforensics wrote:I also hear a difference when I mix in Live compared to Acid or Pro tools...I can't pin point what it is either..

Panning laws...............there arn't any for abe's.......

Other than that.......it's one of the best............very crisp and clean

DOH! I should have read further..........anyways, it's the panning laws......

eyeknow · Post by **eyeknow** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 11:31 am

pulsoc wrote:I like the way Live sounds. It sounds yummy.

It DOES sound yummy.......and I use pt ( and now logic ) all the time.

I am so glad that I'm back in the saddle with live.........

HD1 · Post by **HD1** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 11:41 am

those who say all software sounds the same due to MATH .... are missing something very obvious, the fact that each piece of software puts the math/sound through its own tailored & different processes/algorhithms. There is a huge possibility that logic sounds different to live for any number of reasons, and of course one is free to deduce that it sounds better or worse.

I refuse to believe every piece of software is essentially the same piece of maths with a different interface. If you can get your head around plugins/algorhithms changing the sound/maths...then why cant you believe that there are processes running in the background of each piece of software which can essentially produce different versions of the same sound/math ...

1+1=2 ...lol

SubFunk · Post by **SubFunk** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:24 pm

hi ropey, few
and i really have started to have doubts about the local intelligence,
and actual knowledge.

i am totally with you and you are right.

SubFunk · Post by **SubFunk** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:28 pm

mr. yellow wrote:

Which is in a way exactly why this thread and all the others like it are so
VERY stupid. Mix in whatever you like using and get the result you are
looking for, then burn it. Just don't say that the software resulted in that
mix being that way.... Ears and taste generated the result.

this is out of question and you are absolutely right. but doesn't change the fact that there are differences in the first place, good or bad. how to handle that,
is... at that point you are right, about everyones individual skills / taste and ears.

MrYellow · Post by **MrYellow** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:31 pm

I refuse to believe every piece of software is essentially the same piece of maths with a different interface. If you can get your head around plugins/algorhithms changing the sound/maths...then why cant you believe that there are processes running in the background of each piece of software which can essentially produce different versions of the same sound/math ...

Believe it..... AGGRRRH Why do I do this to myself.

The job of any of these DAWs is just to mix stuff..... Mixing is adding stuff
together (essentially). Adding stuff together can only be done one way
really, you take one, and you add the other to it, and it gives you a result.

Processing audio is different of course, but that's "effecting" audio, not just
mixing it.

If I was to build a delay plugin......

I'd read the current sample buffer, it'd give me a number, I'd store this
number in an array. Then as the input loops around and time passes, I can
pull this number back out of the array and insert/mix it in the "now"......
I would have just taken a sample from the past and inserted it in the
now...... If I wanted to modulate it with another signal I could take the
sample from the input signal and multiply it by the signal from another
source thus giving the output characteristics of both. I could also multiple
them together, then divide them by half the first plus 0.000003.... It'd be a
unique sound, unique to that plugin.

There is a very big difference between 1+1.... and (1*2)/(1/2)+0.000003

One is very simple math which is always the same. The other is a subjective
effect made to color the sound in a given way. DAWs aren't designed to
color the sound, sorry to disappoint. It's just not what they are designed to
do. If ProTools wanted to sound cool, they could add some bass and some
nice highs to make their system sound cool, much like what happens at the
hifi store when some clown gets sold a dud system just because the bass is
turned way up...... but that's not their business.... They are in the business
of hosting effects.... and adding stuff together.

Any color you hear is your ears playing tricks. It's gain....

It's amazing what a few db can do to your ears.... When we first did the
blind tests here I didn't wanna cheat and really gave my ears a work out on
different monitors trying to figure out what the difference was. My ears told
me all sorts of things, more bass, faster transients, a lil sparkle..... Which
was scientifically proved to be 2.48db of flat-response gain

-Ben

MrYellow · Post by **MrYellow** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:33 pm

fact that there are differences in the first place, good or bad

What differences?
Where?
Show me a difference anywhere. (apart from panning laws)

-Ben

eyeknow · Post by **eyeknow** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:36 pm

I can feel it dave...............I can feel it.

I can feel my mind slipping dave...............good morning gentlemen...........I'd like to sing you a song............daisy.......daisy..........

HD1 · Post by **HD1** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:49 pm

kind of a redundant post there Yellow....

you said all these daws sound the same because they all use maths. All I am saying is that each daw has its own routines which can quite easily produce differing sounds. The nerds at logic HQ might have different priorities to the nerds at ableton HQ , and contrary to what YOU believe a daw must do THEY might have their own beliefs and standards, ......ultimately, the proof is in the pudding....not in your logic that maths dictates all daw's sound the same.

if someone wants to know if ableton live sounds pro, reducing the question down to 1+1=2 ....is just plain wrong

I've read that cubase sx sounds different to logic....why? because exactly like I'm saying the nerds at cubase HQ prefer to emphasise the base mathmatics a little...because thats what they like. and thus a punter who likes how it sounds picks it up. and so goes the story of creation. amen.

MrYellow · Post by **MrYellow** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:59 pm

All I am saying is that each daw has its own routines which can quite easily
produce differing sounds.

They all use the one routine.....

+

The difference is in which panning law they choose.

Mixing 2 sounds isn't a subjective thing where you build some complex
function that performs a bunch of math on a signal which can differ from
company to company..... Mixing is adding.

I was a skeptic too before I understood. When we did blind tests on it here
I was one of the first to question everything, twice. I even forgot I had seen
a silent 0db file from 2 superimposed files, I continued to doubt. Then I
remembered seeing the silence... Silence is zero, zero is no difference, no
difference = exactly the same.

Don't believe me? Prove me wrong.

-Ben

nolus · Post by **nolus** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 1:33 pm

MrYellow wrote:
All I am saying is that each daw has its own routines which can quite easily
produce differing sounds.
They all use the one routine.....

+

The difference is in which panning law they choose.

Mixing 2 sounds isn't a subjective thing where you build some complex
function that performs a bunch of math on a signal which can differ from
company to company..... Mixing is adding.

I was a skeptic too before I understood. When we did blind tests on it here
I was one of the first to question everything, twice. I even forgot I had seen
a silent 0db file from 2 superimposed files, I continued to doubt. Then I
remembered seeing the silence... Silence is zero, zero is no difference, no
difference = exactly the same.

Don't believe me? Prove me wrong.

-Ben

actually it's more like:
((chan1signal*chan1gain) + (chan2signal*chan2gain) + (chan3signal*chan3gain) + (chan4signal*chan4gain) + ...) * masterGain

so there is some room for rounding errors in the multiplications.
but with 32 significant bits the signal would have to go through very many gain stages before the resulting error crept into the resulting 16 bit ( or even 24bit) value.

does a production completed on one DAW sound different to a production done on an other? most likely given that all the sound processing tools are different. Surely this is why we buy a particular program, because we like the tools it provides us with.

whether or not one of these two productions sound better than the other is purely subjective.

just my 2 bits

SubFunk · Post by **SubFunk** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 1:35 pm

oh mr. yellow, please do me a great faver and tell what you just wrote to one of the developers of for example SonicHD, sequoia, pyramix. they will have the laugh of the century so i do.

ff4sale · Post by **ff4sale** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:13 pm

god, this thread is so stupid. why did i ever bring it up? i'm gonna stick with logic - i sound better in logic.

Chris J · Post by **Chris J** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:26 pm

interesting different point of views.

Even more interesting is that Robert who works at Ableton said that THERE WAS no difference between all DAWS, I think he should know.

And yet I read in technical magazines that there IS a difference between all daws in the way they add signals together...

All I know is that in live I have to turn every fader down halfway not to clip on the master, leaving me with a ridiculous short run of faders, I often have to also turn the master down a bit. Something I don't do with the same files in Cubase, tell me why.

HD1 · Post by **HD1** » Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:31 pm

heh...remember robert is human like us, capable of being shortsighted or wrong and like anyone else selling a product, is likely to use rhetoric and summations which make his product look better or comparable with other similar products leading in the market.

whether thats the case or not, I dont care. The point is its possible, therefore its folly to bank on it one way or the other, in my opinion