Ableton Forum

'plastique' is a made up word isn't it?

yeah, its french for "colour"

Ableton - Nice transient attack but kinda plastique sounding compared to others...

HA!! I know my ears don't lie of course for a shitty trance producer ist this not a problem...
and the rest try this

mdb wrote:
The shootout I did was done in a professional studio and monitored through $25k Monitors --> http://www.transaudiogroup.com/atc/scm3 ... ount.shtml - They were all internal laybacks rendered in each program. You could EASILY hear the differences between EVERYTHING we tested. Did the test about a year and half ago, and only tested the real major players at that time.

Heres what we tested and heres my first impressions, if i can remember correctly...

Ableton - Nice transient attack but kinda plastique sounding compared to others.. Not horrible, but noticable
PT 7.4 - Actually had "no comment" for it on my notes.. didnt like it at all - Boring and lifeless(I laughed when i saw the results)
Reaper - Was my second choice - The low end was super fat in Reaper
Samplitude - My final choice - Smoked everything.. Very clear, Very wide.. "smooth" sounding, very plesant to the ears. Best Balance
Cubase - Decent - Lacking depth and lacking the clarity that Reaper and Samplitude had.
Nuendo - Almost the same as Cubase - Slighty more space and mid/bass response.
Sonar 8 - Very clear, Very Balanced - Low end wasnt quite as fat as the Reaper and Samplitude. Was my third choice.
Logic 8 - Messy Low end - Harsh Mids - Decent transient attack - Not that great compared to the others.

So, bare with me, you guys had the exact same project loaded into all of those different programs, cross platform as well????

If they were different songs or audio files, then the differences you heard in each program could have been do to the mix itself, especially when you consider the track counts that you mentioned.

I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but I just don't see how you make those conclusions based on the info that you have given so far. For example, you said that Reaper had a "super fat low end", but that Sonar's wasn't quite as fat. If I were mixing Hip Hop in Sonar, and Rock and Roll in Reaper, and you heard both mixes, which one do you think would have a "super fat low end". In that example, Sonar would.

Do you see my point?

Are we ultimately looking at a convenience versus optimal audio with a program like Live? Are some of the algorithms that create the Live "magic" (i.e. time stretching) creating a subtle trade-off between practical and ideal audio quality?

If this is the case, then are there certain techniques one when working not in a live setting but in a studio setting- where perfect audio quality is a top priority?

I don't know the answers, and I'm not trying to stir this pot, but I am curious.

The only reason I ask is because I do notice a difference in audio quality when I use Ableton vs Sony Acid. For a Dj style mashup, I will consistently hear that the Acid finished product sounds a bit more full and clear that the ones produced and mastered in Ableton. Even so, I continue to use Ableton because I ultimately prefer Ableton as a working environment.

I think that a professional producer of a genre such as tech house would find this to be a big deal, as it's often the subtle nuances of sound that make for a great tech track. I'd be interested to hear any professional producers such as this comment on the sound quality of their final product in Ableton as it compares to tracks made in other softwares, and if there are any techniques one should employ in Ableton to achieve the best possible sound.

Finally, the overall convenience and design of Live keeps me a loyal user.

tigali wrote:

mdb wrote: Heres what we tested and heres my first impressions, if i can remember correctly...

Ableton - Nice transient attack but kinda plastique sounding compared to others.. Not horrible, but noticable
PT 7.4 - Actually had "no comment" for it on my notes.. didnt like it at all - Boring and lifeless(I laughed when i saw the results)
Reaper - Was my second choice - The low end was super fat in Reaper
Samplitude - My final choice - Smoked everything.. Very clear, Very wide.. "smooth" sounding, very plesant to the ears. Best Balance
Cubase - Decent - Lacking depth and lacking the clarity that Reaper and Samplitude had.
Nuendo - Almost the same as Cubase - Slighty more space and mid/bass response.
Sonar 8 - Very clear, Very Balanced - Low end wasnt quite as fat as the Reaper and Samplitude. Was my third choice.
Logic 8 - Messy Low end - Harsh Mids - Decent transient attack - Not that great compared to the others.

What unbelievable horse shit.

mdb is right on the money. if any of you guys could hear properly this would be a non issue

just keep making your ableton music and see where it gets you!

diskowipe wrote: mdb is right on the money. if any of you guys could hear properly this would be a non issue

just keep making your ableton music and see where it gets you!

diskowipe wrote:

tigali wrote:

mdb wrote: Heres what we tested and heres my first impressions, if i can remember correctly...

Ableton - Nice transient attack but kinda plastique sounding compared to others.. Not horrible, but noticable
PT 7.4 - Actually had "no comment" for it on my notes.. didnt like it at all - Boring and lifeless(I laughed when i saw the results)
Reaper - Was my second choice - The low end was super fat in Reaper
Samplitude - My final choice - Smoked everything.. Very clear, Very wide.. "smooth" sounding, very plesant to the ears. Best Balance
Cubase - Decent - Lacking depth and lacking the clarity that Reaper and Samplitude had.
Nuendo - Almost the same as Cubase - Slighty more space and mid/bass response.
Sonar 8 - Very clear, Very Balanced - Low end wasnt quite as fat as the Reaper and Samplitude. Was my third choice.
Logic 8 - Messy Low end - Harsh Mids - Decent transient attack - Not that great compared to the others.

What unbelievable horse shit.

mdb is right on the money. if any of you guys could hear properly this would be a non issue

just keep making your ableton music and see where it gets you!

mate, you are being a bit of a silly girl.

He only said Live sounded 'plastique'. Since this is a made up word, he isn't really saying anything. It seems strange to go to such lengths for a test and then write nothing that anyone could use to assist them in defining the sound.

Plenty of people use Live for producing and for live performance without issue. You found your answer in a hardware compressor, others find it in software. It's a non issue once the track is mastered anyway.

It is just silly to labour a point that doesn't matter. You're happy with your tools and that's made you a very succesful beatportee in your eyes. Great.

I like Live, I like the way it sounds and i like the music I make with it. If it ever ended up on Beatport, that would be the day I stop making music. That's me, my goals are different.

horses for courses, differences of opinion, different tools, different people.

s'no big deal.

mdb wrote: Heres what we tested and heres my first impressions, if i can remember correctly...

He forgot to tell us that they were all on lsd.

mdb wrote: Do i need to post a screenshot with 100 tracks, and 60 plugins so that you can see that people DO mix large tracks? Hell, read around gearslutz and youll see a guy named Ken Lewis talking about 225 track songs with some of those Puff Daddy artists.. Danity Kane and that other boy band he has. 100 tracks just of vocals alone.. THATS REAL WORLD!

Right, because in order to make music as good sounding as boy bands and Puff Daddy artists...

you guys want a perfect example of 2-dimensional ableton sound.

listen to monolakes new album... before i get completely flamed and my ableton license deactivated

there is no low end in that album, no thickness. same with the atlas release, i used to love his music and there were things in the past that i listened to all the time.

but the sound of that album ensures that i will ever go back to it and listen over the years

thin, no bottom, too clean, boring. i didnt even finish listening to all the tracks cause my ears get tired

peace

diskowipe wrote:you guys want a perfect example of 2-dimensional ableton sound.

listen to monolakes new album... before i get completely flamed and my ableton license deactivated

there is no low end in that album, no thickness. same with the atlas release, i used to love his music and there were things in the past that i listened to all the time.

but the sound of that album ensures that i will ever go back to it and listen over the years

thin, no bottom, too clean, boring. i didnt even finish listening to all the tracks cause my ears get tired

peace

If that's the way you feel, then that's ok. No one here is trying to force you to use or listen to music made in Live. You are entitled to your opinion, but without mathmatical proof, that's all your rants are, just more opinions. My suggestion to you is to find something that sounds like you want it to and use that.

the proof is in the bass, or lack of

unfortunately im forced to listen to it all the time in the clubs. it's usually around the time people stop dancing

diskowipe wrote:the proof is in the bass, or lack of

unfortunately im forced to listen to it all the time in the clubs. it's usually around the time people stop dancing

What are you, a BASS head?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qP2Jk7kFas

diskowipe wrote:you guys want a perfect example of 2-dimensional ableton sound.

listen to monolakes new album... before i get completely flamed and my ableton license deactivated

there is no low end in that album, no thickness. same with the atlas release, i used to love his music and there were things in the past that i listened to all the time.

but the sound of that album ensures that i will ever go back to it and listen over the years

thin, no bottom, too clean, boring. i didnt even finish listening to all the tracks cause my ears get tired

peace

Subjective bullshit. Come back on this with some proof, or just drop it. You're just repeating yourself ad nauseum.