Ableton Forum

if Live has such a bad and identifiable sound then why have i had people - and i mean people familiar with these things - ask me what sequencer i use?

not really sure why i keep coming back to this board, cant seem to get away.

i think i may have an explanation for the varied opinions/results as i keep doing my own research and practice

it all comes back to the understanding of dynamic range and how the settings you choose are related to the mixer...

there are many threads about sample rate but i have yet to see anyone talk about how sample rate and bit depth are intertwined and what that means for dynamic range.

bit depth = the number of bits used to represent each sample, therefore using a higher bit depth will yield more exact results when applied to a higher sample rate and in turn give you a number that equals the overall BitRate (not bit depth)

Bit Rate = sample rate x number of channels (2) x Bit depth

so using a higher sample rate has a direct impact of the dynamic range and how exactly the computer can match the intended analog waveforms. both bit depth and sample rate are equally important.

now, take into account the recording depth set in the program. live handles audio at 32bit float in the mixer but still allows you to record 24 or even 16 bit files. this is where im not 100% but i think the number you set this figure to has an influence on the scale of how the bit depth resolution is utilized on the mixer. For instance, i think if you were working at a 32 bit recording depth but still mixing with respect to real-world analog (lower) levels then you are not using all of the intended resolution and the sound is less defined. whereas, like the every single live lesson, if you are working in 32bit and you mix hotter, allowing channels to cross the imaginary 0 boundry then more of the allocated resolution is utilized.

im not sure if i completely got it right, but working in 32/96 and using more of the available dynamic range has had a huge impact on my quality in ableton. I also believe that using the floating point headroom and more of the dynamic range will give you a better result when converting down as the number of bits (bitrate) will be larger and wont be compromised from the down scale...

im pretty sure companies utilize different scales for the bit resolution in the mixer and accounts for alot of these issues of sound quality and mixed results from program to program. So if you want to work traditionally in Live its probably best to utilize a 24bit depth to ensure maximum use of resolution due to the scaling of the bit depth in the mixer.

i was the one who started the thread about "Live has huge headroom" and i stated i noticed an increase in sound quality when allowing channels to hit over the zero mark in the mixer. some people said that there is no "fatness or color" being added but im quite certain at this point that i was simple using more of my available resolution which in turn increased my dynamic range and ultimately SOUND QUALITY.

moral of the story, "hack the digital dynamic range"

Some thoughts, and a wacky theory.

Just for fun y'understand.

http://www.blipways.com/blog/?p=7

i think i may have an explanation for the varied opinions/results as i keep doing my own research and practice

nope, there are some mistakes.

it all comes back to the understanding of dynamic range and how the settings you choose are related to the mixer...

there are many threads about sample rate but i have yet to see anyone talk about how sample rate and bit depth are intertwined and what that means for dynamic range.

because it's the same basic concept for all DAWs. there's a difference with 64 bit summing vs. 32 bit summing but it's on the order -90dB or something, REALLY low.

bit depth = the number of bits used to represent each sample, therefore using a higher bit depth will yield more exact results when applied to a higher sample rate and in turn give you a number that equals the overall BitRate (not bit depth)

Bit Rate = sample rate x number of channels (2) x Bit depth

so using a higher sample rate has a direct impact of the dynamic range and how exactly the computer can match the intended analog waveforms. both bit depth and sample rate are equally important.

nope. bit depth affects the dynamic range, sample rate has nothing to do with dynamic range it only pertains to the range of frequencies you can reproduce and file size you end up with.

now, take into account the recording depth set in the program. live handles audio at 32bit float in the mixer but still allows you to record 24 or even 16 bit files. this is where im not 100% but i think the number you set this figure to has an influence on the scale of how the bit depth resolution is utilized on the mixer. For instance, i think if you were working at a 32 bit recording depth but still mixing with respect to real-world analog (lower) levels then you are not using all of the intended resolution and the sound is less defined. whereas, like the every single live lesson, if you are working in 32bit and you mix hotter, allowing channels to cross the imaginary 0 boundry then more of the allocated resolution is utilized.

this is incorrect, based on the wrong assumptions above.

im not sure if i completely got it right, but working in 32/96 and using more of the available dynamic range has had a huge impact on my quality in ableton. I also believe that using the floating point headroom and more of the dynamic range will give you a better result when converting down as the number of bits (bitrate) will be larger and wont be compromised from the down scale...

again, bit depth affects dynamic range. 16 bits has a lower dynamic range than 32 bit. does 16 bit sound bad? every single CD you've ever heard has been 16 bit and surely many of them blew you away. there are enhanced CD formats, I'm talking run of the mill CDs, they can sound outstanding. the advantage of 32 bit is far surpassed by one's ability to do a kick ass mix to begin with. you can prattle on about this shit all day but if your mixing skills aren't top notch, this pseudo intellectual chin stroking bullshit does not matter.

im pretty sure companies utilize different scales for the bit resolution in the mixer and accounts for alot of these issues of sound quality and mixed results from program to program. So if you want to work traditionally in Live its probably best to utilize a 24bit depth to ensure maximum use of resolution due to the scaling of the bit depth in the mixer.

32 bit summing vs 64 bit summing, the difference is very very subtle. the general consensus is that it was done to keep up with Sonar, it's all marketing driving that decision.

i was the one who started the thread about "Live has huge headroom" and i stated i noticed an increase in sound quality when allowing channels to hit over the zero mark in the mixer. some people said that there is no "fatness or color" being added but im quite certain at this point that i was simple using more of my available resolution which in turn increased my dynamic range and ultimately SOUND QUALITY.

it's common knowledge that louder sounds better. that's what you heard. when it comes to mixing tracks you want them all hot and then when you bring them together you want to keep the Master hot and turn the tracks down. as opposed to having the Master low and tracks hot which increases the SNR of the project as well as its dynamic range at the Master. I think Tarekith has a guide on this, it's been beat to death on the forum.


can we just let this thread die already??

im sorry but you are wrong man, just spare everyone your overly jaded opinions based on being a talentless piece of shit that im sure everyone is sick of listening to. i only come on this board every so often and always there you are. you are a bullshit artist and a total fucking loser. dont tell me what i hear and dont hear, i hear things you will never hear which is why my tracks get played all over the world while you tell everyone off based on your own artistic shortcomings

sample rate and bit depth are interrelated in direct correlation with dynamic range and ultimately bit rate

i can easily measure the amount of bit depth in actual use in ableton by using Stillwell Bittersweet on the master to monitor the bit changes as i scale the faders

maybe i speculated on the mixer scaling part but do some wiki reading and shut the fuck up. i learnede this in one night so im not an expert but the factual logic is solid. doesnt matter to me anyway, ableton or any program has never affected my music and im far far ahead of you in that department i can guarantee that 10000%%


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_bit_depth

Calculating values
There is an easy way to determine a file's bit rate when given sufficient information. In fact, as long as you know any three of the following four values, you can calculate the missing value.
Bit rate = (sampling rate) x (number of channels) x (bit depth)
For a recording with a 44.1 kHz sampling rate, 2 channels (stereo) and a 16 bit depth:
44100 x 2 x 16 = 1411200 bits per second, or, 1411.2 kbit/s

Sample Rates and Bit Depth

Digital audio is a computerized representation of real-life sounds. In order to be processed on a computer, analog audio must be converted into digital data. The quality of the audio is determined by the sample rate and bit depth at which the audio was captured. The higher the sample rate and bit depth (within reason!), the better the quality of the audio.
Sample Rate refers to how many times per second the audio information is captured. Sample rates are measured in Kilohertz (KHz). 1 KHz equals 1000 samples per second. So, audio recorded at 44.1 KHz captures data at a rate of 44,100 samples per second. Most audio interfaces support sample rates of 44.1, 48, 88.2, and 96 KHz. Many higher-end devices also support 176.4 and 192 KHz sample rates as well.
Bit Depth refers to how much information is captured with a sample. Each sample measures the amplitude (shape) of the wave, and higher bit depths allow the analog shape to be more closely matched. Imagine a piece of graph paper, on which you were trying to line up the graph with the smooth analog curve of a sine wave. The smaller the boxes on the graph (higher bit depth), the more closely you could match the shape of the sine wave.
In the diagrams below, the X axis represents sample rate (each line equals one sample) and the Y axis represents bit depth.


At a low bit depth, the shape of the wave cannot be matched very closely


At a low sample rate, the shape of the wave also cannot be matched very closely


At a higher sample rate and bit depth, the shape of the wave can be more closely matched.


However, the higher the frequency of the sound, the more difficult it is to closely match the wave.
Bit depth is exponential, so a 24-bit sample holds 256 times as much information as a 16-bit sample. A 16-bit sample has a range of 65,536 values, while a 24-bit sample has a range of 16,777,216.

diskowipe wrote:being a talentless piece of shit that im sure everyone is sick of listening to.

ermm.. pffft.. who are you?

/BOOT failure
please insert disk an press a key.

Poster wrote:

diskowipe wrote:being a talentless piece of shit that im sure everyone is sick of listening to.

ermm.. pffft.. who are you?

You don't know who this guy is? Really?
Its Phil Spector, that's who he is!
P.S don't get him too angry.

glenn303 wrote:

Poster wrote:

diskowipe wrote:being a talentless piece of shit that im sure everyone is sick of listening to.

ermm.. pffft.. who are you?

You don't know who this guy is? Really?
Its Phil Spector, that's who he is!
P.S don't get him too angry.

yeah well.. he obviously doesn't know Tone yet.. one of the few out here who I listen to when it comes to audio theory talk..
quite funny seeing people copy/paste those audio Wiki pages to claim a piece of the pie..

what pie are we eating here anyway?

hype pie.

[img]http://www.u2station.com/news/archives/5.24.02.jpg[/img] wrote: dont tell me what i hear and dont hear, i hear things you will never hear which is why my tracks get played all over the world

this

Tone Deft wrote:you can prattle on about this shit all day but if your mixing skills aren't top notch, this pseudo intellectual chin stroking bullshit does not matter.

hey, i wonder what's going on on the ableton forum.





oh.






.lm.

diskowipe wrote: sample rate and bit depth are interrelated in direct correlation with dynamic range and ultimately bit rate

errr, no.

a little wikipedia is a dangerous thing.

bit depth determines dynamic range, although there is very little to be gained by going higher than 24 bits, which theoretically gives you 144dB of dynamic range.

the sample rate determines how closely each consecutive set of bits follows the analog waveform, it does not determine dynamic range.

if your logic was correct, then you would be able to make a 1 bit recording that sounded good as long as the sample rate was very very high. it's true that bit depth x sample rate = bit rate, however bit depth and sample rate are independent parameters in the equation.

fishmonkey wrote:you would be able to make a 1 bit recording that sounded good as long as the sample rate was very very high.

Not sure exactly what diskowipe is saying there but as regards the above, that's sort of what you can do. It might even be the future of digital recording.

http://www.acousticfingerstyle.com/1_Bi ... ording.htm

Sampling theory as generally interpreted supposedly says that sampling at a given rate gives an accurate picture of the frequency content present up to half the sampling rate. Which is kind of correct but actually there are a few limiting factors which aren't always taken into consideration, including the quality of the necessary band-limiting (to prevent aliasing), and also phase differences that occur at intervals smaller than the sampling rate.

diskowipe wrote:im sorry but you are wrong man, just spare everyone your overly jaded opinions based on being a talentless piece of shit that im sure everyone is sick of listening to. i only come on this board every so often and always there you are. you are a bullshit artist and a total fucking loser. dont tell me what i hear and dont hear, i hear things you will never hear which is why my tracks get played all over the world while you tell everyone off based on your own artistic shortcomings

sample rate and bit depth are interrelated in direct correlation with dynamic range and ultimately bit rate

i can easily measure the amount of bit depth in actual use in ableton by using Stillwell Bittersweet on the master to monitor the bit changes as i scale the faders

maybe i speculated on the mixer scaling part but do some wiki reading and shut the fuck up. i learnede this in one night so im not an expert but the factual logic is solid. doesnt matter to me anyway, ableton or any program has never affected my music and im far far ahead of you in that department i can guarantee that 10000%%


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_bit_depth

Calculating values
There is an easy way to determine a file's bit rate when given sufficient information. In fact, as long as you know any three of the following four values, you can calculate the missing value.
Bit rate = (sampling rate) x (number of channels) x (bit depth)
For a recording with a 44.1 kHz sampling rate, 2 channels (stereo) and a 16 bit depth:
44100 x 2 x 16 = 1411200 bits per second, or, 1411.2 kbit/s

Sample Rates and Bit Depth

Digital audio is a computerized representation of real-life sounds. In order to be processed on a computer, analog audio must be converted into digital data. The quality of the audio is determined by the sample rate and bit depth at which the audio was captured. The higher the sample rate and bit depth (within reason!), the better the quality of the audio.
Sample Rate refers to how many times per second the audio information is captured. Sample rates are measured in Kilohertz (KHz). 1 KHz equals 1000 samples per second. So, audio recorded at 44.1 KHz captures data at a rate of 44,100 samples per second. Most audio interfaces support sample rates of 44.1, 48, 88.2, and 96 KHz. Many higher-end devices also support 176.4 and 192 KHz sample rates as well.
Bit Depth refers to how much information is captured with a sample. Each sample measures the amplitude (shape) of the wave, and higher bit depths allow the analog shape to be more closely matched. Imagine a piece of graph paper, on which you were trying to line up the graph with the smooth analog curve of a sine wave. The smaller the boxes on the graph (higher bit depth), the more closely you could match the shape of the sine wave.
In the diagrams below, the X axis represents sample rate (each line equals one sample) and the Y axis represents bit depth.


At a low bit depth, the shape of the wave cannot be matched very closely


At a low sample rate, the shape of the wave also cannot be matched very closely


At a higher sample rate and bit depth, the shape of the wave can be more closely matched.


However, the higher the frequency of the sound, the more difficult it is to closely match the wave.
Bit depth is exponential, so a 24-bit sample holds 256 times as much information as a 16-bit sample. A 16-bit sample has a range of 65,536 values, while a 24-bit sample has a range of 16,777,216.

Wikipedia's article is right. But you just don't understand it.