Lives sound engine argument again ...
-
- Posts: 4721
- Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 12:45 am
- Location: New Jersey
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
@KK, I never said warping couldn't be improved. But I don't use it (with the exception of using it specifically as an effect), except for when i DJ, and then i use re-pitch anyway.
But let's not confuse that with the non-existent problem with live's "audio engine."
you did agree with a user who said there was something wrong with the way live sounds, and then you said it was because of warping.
I think that statement is misleading and untrue.
.lm.
But let's not confuse that with the non-existent problem with live's "audio engine."
you did agree with a user who said there was something wrong with the way live sounds, and then you said it was because of warping.
I think that statement is misleading and untrue.
.lm.
TimeableFloat ???S?e?n?d?I?n?f?o
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
btw this is a very wrong statement. you just post stuff that's totally wrong and misleading. it's an audio forum, I love audio, so I take it 'seriously' when misleading information is posted.evon wrote:My statements can be very powerful and usually are capable of evoking that kind of reaction, so I understand.
In my life
Why do I smile
At people who I'd much rather kick in the eye?
-Moz
Why do I smile
At people who I'd much rather kick in the eye?
-Moz
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
And what's your criteria for determining bias? It seems like you only hear what you want to hear. If you really care about this issue, setup a legit test where you can collect some data on whether anyone can really tell the difference in DAWs, or find one that backs up your hypothesis. Any less and you are just blowing hot air, not making 'powerful statements'.evon wrote:Based on all the unbiased comments..Live sucks in comparison.
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
Warping quality and the Ableton's audio engine are two separate discussions/topics/issues.
-
- Posts: 19072
- Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:46 pm
- Location: Ableton Forum Administrator
- Contact:
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
I gotta mom and pop.
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
Tarekith wrote:I gotta mom and pop.
Thats clever!
too many lasers...
-
- Posts: 4336
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 7:08 pm
- Location: la
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
I only agreed with a couple sentiments he had. It's in my post.leisuremuffin wrote:@KK, I never said warping couldn't be improved. But I don't use it (with the exception of using it specifically as an effect), except for when i DJ, and then i use re-pitch anyway.
But let's not confuse that with the non-existent problem with live's "audio engine."
you did agree with a user who said there was something wrong with the way live sounds, and then you said it was because of warping.
I think that statement is misleading and untrue.
.lm.
But I don't think there's a problem with the audio engine per se cuz for me, it's a warp, session view machine. I think it needs improvements and expressed abes hopefully giving warp a lot more attention. That's it. I agree with both of you on a few things, but no need to rope me into the dudes total message which i'm not even sure about.
Warping quality and the Ableton's audio engine are two separate discussions/topics/issues.
-
- Posts: 4336
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 7:08 pm
- Location: la
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
no, it's about music. The stars don't question what they use cuz they're busy.evon wrote:@Tone Deft, i'll take your word for it and in the spirit of an earlier post of mine, evon should post his music to prove if he even needs it.
This is not about music.this is about sound.. the quality... the characteristics of a sound!!
Based on all the unbiased comments..Live sucks in comparison.
Speak to the guys that make hits..guys that know how to make sounds pleasing to sell millions.
Lets face it, that definately is not Live's forte.
What the big record makers don't get, is frustrated at gear. It simply isn't used if so.
Facts are, Abes does not cater to that click, but hits can be made on just about any medium.
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
Not on my wax discs.j2j wrote:Does anybody get clicks and pops?
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
Congratulations you win QUOTE OF THE DAY !leisuremuffin wrote:it's the ass in the chair more than it is the shit on the desk.
; )
JaseFOS
-Live10.1 |Push2|Maschinemk2|KeyLab61|LaunchPad|MCUpro|MCExt|MCExt|iPad2|TouchABLE2
-Mac Pro 5.1 (dual hex core Xeon 3.46gHz, 28Gb RAM) running MacOS 10.13.6
-Universal Audio Apollo Quad (firewire)
-SHITLOADS OF HARDWARE SYNTHS
-Live10.1 |Push2|Maschinemk2|KeyLab61|LaunchPad|MCUpro|MCExt|MCExt|iPad2|TouchABLE2
-Mac Pro 5.1 (dual hex core Xeon 3.46gHz, 28Gb RAM) running MacOS 10.13.6
-Universal Audio Apollo Quad (firewire)
-SHITLOADS OF HARDWARE SYNTHS
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
Fuck me...
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
This thread = TLDR, but FFS is this topic REALLY being discussed again???
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
+1leedsquietman wrote:When you use the same raw audio with no plugins, at the same pan law, there is NO DIFFERENCE. The only one with a tiniest amount of difference (not better, just different) was PTHD because of fixed point 48 bit conversion, instead of 32 bit floating point conversion.
Live doesn't allow you to change the pan law which could differ from the defaults in some other DAWS.
Null tests work just fine, as do my ears and I have 23 years of recording experience.
The reason WHY people say Logic, Cubase and others sound better is a) people have a misconception of Live as being a DJ's toy software and looking like an Excel screen must make it sound crap. b) Logic, Cubase and others do have better (IMO) plugins in the box and this is the difference people hear. People are not comparing raw audio files with nothing touched and no plugins applied, they are comparing files which have been processed through different plugins. You get a good 3rd party plugin such as SOnalksis's SV517mkII EQ and use the same settings in Live or Cubase, it sounds THE SAME !!
Thanks for seriously answering a pointless post. Nothing more to say here.
Re: Lives sound engine argument again ...
knotkranky wrote:no, it's about music. The stars don't question what they use cuz they're busy.evon wrote:@Tone Deft, i'll take your word for it and in the spirit of an earlier post of mine, evon should post his music to prove if he even needs it.
This is not about music.this is about sound.. the quality... the characteristics of a sound!!
Based on all the unbiased comments..Live sucks in comparison.
Speak to the guys that make hits..guys that know how to make sounds pleasing to sell millions.
Lets face it, that definately is not Live's forte.
What the big record makers don't get, is frustrated at gear. It simply isn't used if so.
Facts are, Abes does not cater to that click, but hits can be made on just about any medium.
So why not use the best sound/audio available to make the music?!
fe real!