Tone Deft > I think its a little rude of you to say the programmers I spoke to are dumbsh**s. I dont mean they are my friends but I was able to speak to them and that is exactly what they told me. I think it would be inappropriate for me to say which company they work for, but you are entitled to your opinion.
Thank you for the link
Ableton say > "Live 7's enhanced audio engine improves fidelity with precision 64-bit summing at all mix points throughout the program, POW-r dithering, optimized sample-rate conversion and other advances"
I think what they say is vague don't you. Why not say the audio sound is better rather than fidelity and enhanced. I can enhance something with eq or effects. Fidelity could mean many things i think and perhaps the improvement is in the new powr dithering at all mix stages but does this make for a better audio engine. If it does it must be so miniscule and insignificant that it really isn't worth mentioning because through my Dynaudio BM6A's ( that I don't like) I cant hear any difference at all. They are not the most phase accurate monitors in the world but they are not the worst. I prefer my JBL control 1's but the BM6A's reveal much more. I must consider my ears may not be as sharp as they were when I was twenty but I can still mix decently and know when something is different worth mentioning. Its just that I see people here stating awesome sound - its obvious and so on. Im sceptical, very.
They further say
Device High-Quality ModesOperator, Dynamic Tube and Saturator now feature optional High-Quality modes for anti-aliased processing, reducing typical "digital" artifacts.
Yes of course adding a high quality mode to reduce aliasing will have a positive effect but these are for plug-ins and they are not automatically switched on in their natural state so therefor its a processing matter that improves the sound of plug-ins due to programming, its is not because of a better audio engine. Those that claim they hear a difference I predict imagination (except with hi quality mode plug-ins that reduce aliasing) or simply the need to think its better.
yes I agree there is a lot more to audio than headroom but when the software reached decent levels of headroom around five years ago that really was a change we could all hear when mixing. Today it seems software companies simply have to add more features or so called features to keep selling.
You say "if you're looking for someone to say it sounds better and give you a measurement, you're not going to get it, it hasn't been done"
With ableton live perhaps and therefor I cannot take the claims seriously at all. But this is not the case with other software. perhaps you may wish to purchase the mix buss c.d. that was made by a number of professionals a few years ago at a time when the mix buss wasn't quite what it seemed. In fact the c.d. seemed to prove that Digidesigns 888/24 interface was flawed causing a dip in frequency at around 30hz (not their mix engine) and actually showed a couple of other software Daws mix buss were flawed. Digidesign and SSL were involved as well as some highly respected audio engineers so it was very proffesionally done. Things have moved on now and since then there has been little talk of flawed mix engines except live for some reason. Is this perhaps just a reflection of the experience of the users in general. But when I see claims of better audio engine and fidelity I have to wonder what was wrong before then. Were ableton programmers previously not quite up to designing a standard mix buss, after all there is a certain generic form of coding a mix buss. Perhaps no ableton programmers have experience in the real world so to speak. A number of engineers are beginning to question the validity of putting all their trust in 25 year old programmers who have never used a real console - operated in a studio - recorded a band - mixed a record and so on and certainly wouldn't know what a real channel strip is. This is not meant as a derogatory statement but I think we can all agree that marketing and sales is what drives software companies.
Thats enough for me on this subject. I never thought there was anything wrong with Lives engine in the first place. I have my answer, its been within me all the time, my ears and I don't give much heed to 64 bit marketing claims.
what you say is based around the science and add to this the marketing campaigns software companies have to do I have to ask where is the human side to this. I have said above I hear no difference at all and it isn't as if I started with music just yesterday and believe my ears are as good as anyone else. I think what I said about 25 year old programmers has a lot of validity because who made them the defining authority on what makes better sound. I know this may be sounding like angry man critical of programmers but Im not like that im just asking direct questions.