Ableton Forum

thank you for the information.

dum wrote:

leedsquietman wrote:read the audio paper on L7 and 8

Non-Neutral Operations
Procedures in Live that will cause a change in audio quality are referred to as non-neutral
operations.

live7 audio fact sheet wrote: Playback in Complex Mode
(without even changing tempo)

Sample rate conversion/transposition

Volume Automation (Automation)
("certain implementations of automation envelopes can result in audible artifacts")

Dithering

Recording external signals (set bit depth < A/D converter)

Recording internal sources below 32 bit

Consolidate

Clip fades

Panning

Global Groove Changes

so, just avoid doing any of the above in live and you can be sure that the output sounds 'identical' to every other daw on the market.

Any recording I do is in 24bit. I pan instruments (who doesn't?). I consolidate clips when necessary. I use automation envelopes all the time, including volume automation.

Does it mean that by doing these mostly essential things, I am getting an inferior sound to other daws?

Gtrance wrote: I pan instruments (who doesn't?). I consolidate clips when necessary. I use automation envelopes all the time, including volume automation.

My point exactly.

Gtrance wrote: Does it mean that by doing these mostly essential things, I am getting an inferior sound to other daws?

It doesn't mean it's inferior. It's just that these operations are handled differently from DAW to DAW. Whether the differences are meaningful or not is up to you, and might depend on the material you work with.

Some people get extremely defensive about this discussion (see: fanboy), and you get silly arguments like "maths is maths so if 1+1=2 all DAWs sound the same" ... or "if I load a WAV into ableton and do nothing to it - then render the output, it sounds identical to the same WAV loaded into logic without anything done to it"

Shit arguments I'm sure you'll agree.

Personally, I have no complaints about Live's sound quality. but it's also the only DAW I use (at the moment) so I have no real frame of reference. Although I'm getting logic soon for personal workflow improvements in arrangement and future projects which specifically call for being proficient with Logic, but as soon as I get it I will probably look into sound quality differences with a few personal 'real-life-usage' tests just because it's been such a hot topic for years.

BTW I always record at 32bit whatever software I use... harddisk space is extremely cheap these days.


Here's some comments Robert Henke made regarding the automation engine and how it's related to audio-output.

http://forum.ableton.com/viewtopic.php? ... 9&start=23

Robert Henke co-founder of Ableton wrote:

Michael-SW wrote:Mixing desks sound different because they use different hardware. DAWs sound exactly the same because they are all using the same mathematical algorithms.

(...)

This is not really true, there are surprisingly many ways to do the same thing. The differences are just not where you would expect them if you have no expert knowledge, and they are all in a range way below of what I personally believe is audible.

Of course summing two or more tracks in every DAW is output = a+b+c+d, where a = signal of track a * volume of track a . So it is impossible to introduce here compression or any change in frequency response, and the dynmanic range if you do this with normal floating point mathematics is allready super big, not talking about the headroom if you do it with 64bit resolution.

But there are other details: if you draw a volume automation curve and this curve has a sharp edge theory says that this edge introduces nonlinear distortions to the signal. A good example for this is what is called "zipper noise" when moving a MIDI fader on a cheap audio processor.MIDI resolution is 128 steps. If you move a fader assigned to volume and you do no further smoothing you will get a bit of noise every time a new value comes in. In order to avoid this you have to create a smooth ramp instead of a sharp edge. This is known and every DAW manufacturer of course does some kind of ramping. But this is nothing where you can look up the one perfect way to do it in some research paper and every company does it like that. Instead it is always a compromise between reaction speed, cpu usage, and resulting quality. Some of our competitors are quite conservative here, they do very long ramps. This minimizes distortion but also makes all automation a bit floppy. Others prefer punchy automation, and as a result are more likely to introduce more distortion. Unless they use a more intelligent alogortihm. Which east more CPU or introduces latency... and so on.

(.....)

Robert

Stop Press : Panning and automation are non neutral operations in ANY DAW. Glueing clips together in other DAWS (equivalent to consolidation) is also non-neutral. The fact Ableton make this information public is refreshing. If Ableton introduced bezier curves like other DAWS then the automation argument would be rendered largely moot but it's still only a minor detail.

By the way, it's not just some people who believe DAW summing is 1+1=2 etc, it's the majority of people who have experience in running multiple systems (and who know those systems inside out) or who have conducted proper testing.

The Flat Earth people are the ones who believe otherwise (often with no experience of other systems, or based on hearsay). A lot of it comes down to studio engineers who know Protools inside out and don't take the time or care to learn other systems who spark much of these rumours about quality. As a Protools and Logic certified engineer, as well as someone who uses Cubase, Reaper, Live and Renoise at home, stop worrying about Live's quality and focus on making music and having fun - if you learn how to use Live and all it's functionality, you have the platform to make great sounding music.

leedsquietman wrote:Stop Press : Panning and automation are non neutral operations in ANY DAW. Glueing clips together in other DAWS (equivalent to consolidation) is also non-neutral. The fact Ableton make this information public is refreshing. If Ableton introduced bezier curves like other DAWS then the automation argument would be rendered largely moot but it's still only a minor detail.

Are you hard of reading ? drunk ? on medication that causes drowsiness ? or did you literally just wake up ?

I never suggested for a moment that Panning & Automation are somehow neutral operations in other DAWs. Isn't that an impossibility ?
What I said in plain english is that each DAW handles those operations differently. And that yes, those operations are absolutely essential for real-life usage of a digital audio workstation.
And how do you figure that if Ableton simply introducing bezier curves the automation argument would be rendered moot ? How ableton implement bezier curves AND how they handle automation would still have to be identical to the methods employed in other DAWs. Unlikely.
And as I said, again in simple english, whether these differences (in essential non-neutral operations) are meaningful is down to the user and maybe also down to the material he works with.

leedsquietman wrote: By the way, it's not just some peopqleu who beloieve DAtW seumming is 1+1=2 etc, it's the majority of people who have experience in running multiple systems (and who know those systems inside out) or who have conducted proper testing.

DAW summing. LOL, way to put words in my mouth. I wasn't referring solely to summing, I was referring to those catch all statements people make to refer to DAW sound quality in it's entirety ...Like the one Robert Henke was responding to in the quote I posted (Michael-SW)
Besides, there's much more to audio quality than simply summing, think 'real-world-usage' i.e. essential non-neutral operations like automation & panning.

leedsquietman wrote: As an unemployed teacher who thinks loading the same WAV file in two seperate DAWs and rendering the output without doing any processing clearly indicates that one DAW sounds just as good as the other, stop worrying about Live's quality and focus on making music and having fun

fixies.

How you manage to misread and misinterpret and read things between the lines is truly awesome.

Has mangling quotations replaced your fetish for googled pictures - the pictures made for better insults, I would revert to those, not that it matters because you fail to inspire anything but a 'meh' response in me.

Unemployed teacher is PART of what my previous job was for the record. If you're going to insult me gets the facts straight teacher .7, senior media engineer (audio and video) .3 - fixies.

leedsquietman wrote:How you manage to misread and misinterpret and read things between the lines is truly awesome.

Has mangling quotations replaced your fetish for googled pictures - the pictures made for better insults, I would revert to those, not that it matters because you fail to inspire anything but a 'meh' response in me.

Unemployed teacher is PART of what my previous job was for the record. If you're going to insult me gets the facts straight teacher .7, senior media engineer (audio and video) .3 - fixies.

Ah yes, an ad hominem response right on cue.

Well, I'll match you:
Thank you for pointing out that it is in fact TWO job categories you are failing in. Duly noted.

What are YOU actually succeeding in - well not providing any links to your music is one thing which springs to mind.

It's hardly relevant. I'm not the one pegging erroneous contradictions on trumped-up qualifications that amount to being unemployed in two job categories. LOLS.

This is just your usual ad-hominem tripe in lieu of conceding.

dum wrote:It's hardly relevant. I'm not the one pegging erroneous contradictions on trumped-up qualifications that amount to being unemployed in two job categories. LOLS.

This is just your usual ad-hominem tripe in lieu of conceding.

i already asked you once... what the hell is your problem?

and btw, it is extremely relevant and the only point that counts.

Usual deflection/avoidance of question.
You would make a great politician, what with your phenomenal knowledge of both the Middle East and Irish 'troubles'.
You'd have those piffling little issues sorted before the kettle boils and have no need to be trolling on the web.

leedsquietman wrote:Usual deflection/avoidance of question.

lol, usual gormless projection.
Deflection/avoidance is exactly the purpose of your ad-hominems.


You talked out of your ass.
I called you on it.
You move on to ad-hominems.


Rinse & Repeat.

Meh. Usual poor, predictable, response. Once you were witty, you're losing your touch old boy.

Whatever. Going to darn my socks now, much more interesting than this tripe.

leedsquietman wrote:Meh. Usual poor, predictable, response. Once you were witty, you're losing your touch old boy.

Whatever. Going to darn my socks now, much more interesting than this tripe.

usual delusional parting shot, after dispatching the usual tired ad-hominems after being called out for making the usual erroneous statements.

fucking hell....arguing about arguing...