Check this, its a Summingtest from a German Youtuber named FMN-Music, just use the English Subtitles if you dont understand German!

 

Last edited: Nov 29, 2017

Do all AD/DA converters the same sound the same?
Should results of an analyzer or scope be ignored?
Should digital being converted to analog for our ears be taken into account or ignored?

 

Roughly. Certainly not the weakest link in the chain -- the amount of distortion introduced by mics/speakers/room acoustics are orders of magnitude higher. That said, the differences are demonstrable & measurable (if not audible)

No. Have you got some?

How is this related to DAWs? DAWs deal with digital signal (math) from start to finish. No D/A/D conversion happens in DAWs :|

 

We hear in analog not digital. The conversion happens between the DAW and sound device, yes? Then our ears get it.
Analysis tools show us where peaks and dips occur as well as overal signal integrity.

 

Yes. All DAWs talk to [the same ASIO] driver, which, in turn, talks to teh DAC. DAWs also render files (numbers).
DOWs have nothing to do with converting a bitstream to analog signal -- they crunch numbers; have no effect on what the driver (or a media player) does with those numbers.

You ask me if we should ignore test data. I ask "what data?" You tell me you ain't got none. Pretty pointless to keep going, no?

 

What we hear is also influenced by other factors than the sound that comes out of a DAW.

So who is one to judge what someone else hears? It could be entirely subjective, which is what these discussions generally conclude.
If someone hears a difference, then by the grace of that, there is a difference. If someone doesn't hear a difference, then there is no difference in the sound.

You can point to all kinds of graphs, but they don't control what goes on in the brain of the subjective listener.

Sound is subjective, not objective.

 

Every DAW sound the same. Their audio engine work in 32 bit floating point. The difference is in your sound card' AD & DA converter. It's the marketing who make people thought a DAW sounds better than another.

 

..

 

Last edited: Nov 30, 2017

For those who have not done, or don't want to do their own test imaging and analysis, some links:

SRC Comparisons
http://src.infinitewave.ca/

Analog to Digital Converter
https://www.coursera.org/learn/tech...ion/lecture/UZPKd/analog-to-digital-converter

What is the Inevitability of D to A Conversion in Music Production? | | shane berry
http://shaneberry.com/what-is-the-inevitability-of-d-to-a-conversion-in-music-production/
Image-Line DAW Wars
https://www.image-line.com/support/FLHelp/html/app_audio.htm

There is a lot of research out their done by universities and pros such as Bob Katz and others.

 

Last edited: Nov 30, 2017

Just curious, did you read/understand any of the links you pasted?

Sample rate conversion. ProTip: Don't do it. Stick to one sample rate per project.

Regardless, even when the most awkward (96 to 44.1, unpleasantly non-integer ratio) conversion was made, with the 96kHz sample containing 48kHz tone @ -6dB (something that seldom occurs in the wild, or shouldn't), the graphs still show nothing worse than what looks to be -120 - -130dB for current DAWs.
TL;DR: If you do everything wrong, you still won't hear the difference.

I'm not sure how to make "DAWS DON'T DEAL WITH DACs" any clearer, but hope springs eternal; I'll try.

Think of the DAC as your headphones, an apartment house, or a small, stubborn child. While all these things may be, and often are, different, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DAWs.
Nothing.
If your headphones sound shitty, they'll sound that way with every DAW. Because just as hapens to be the case with DACs, the DAW doesn't deal with your headphones.
It deals with a middle man, a runner if you will, named ASIO Driver.
ASIO takes ̶y̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶c̶a̶s̶h̶ ̶&̶ ̶t̶e̶l̶l̶s̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶w̶a̶i̶t̶ ̶h̶e̶r̶e̶ the math cooked up by the DAW, and gives it to the DAC. The DAC, in turn, turns that bangin' bitstream into some wiggly analog voltage and sends that to your headphones.
That's how things get done

Tells you that there is no difference between DAWs. Which brings me back to my original question: did you actually read/understand any of the stuff you made me read, or did you just think it was some cold-blooded shit to say to a motherfucker before you popped a cap in his ass?

 

You obviously did not go/read through all of the Image-Line material as expected. That is why I picked it. Just to see if you picked up on their acknowledgement of difference or just took from it what you wanted and left it at that.

Any one can start an argumentative conversation and be stubborn about others input. Too bad....

 

I kind of feel like people are listening through their buttholes..

 

Lol, "It's there, but I won't tell you where. Nyah!"
Wouldn't it have been quicker & simpler to ctrl-c what you think supports your point, & ctrl-v it here? You can still do it you know Or not, up to you

 

Oh, really? Pretty funny because that's how you're behaving right now.

 

You are probably the kind who is never satisfied. I would imagine.

Was trying to find an Article by Eric Persing from some time ago on KVR but, no luck. Their older forum archives seem to be deleted.

Here is another interesting link:
http://www.galaxyclassics.com/index.php/en/recordingen/audiostuff/69-nulltest

 

Reading is fundamental...

 

Did you read?? and BTW, language...

 

Now the SRC Comparisons shows the differences between DAWs in the test performed there with, as requested, images.

This site gives further info into this touchy, ahem...subject.
http://www.galaxyclassics.com/index.php/en/recordingen/audiostuff/69-nulltest

There has also been a raging debate about digital displays. Similar to my ears, my eyes are senstive to the scan rate on
digital displays. A lousy display will make my eyes move noticably leading to tired eyes.

Here's a quick question for all. In a noisy enviroment like an indoor live music event (A level room), what are two items
you can use to quickly isolated/focus your ears?

 

Reading and understanding what you read is fundamental.
Let's see what it is you've linked me to. Ready, Reader? K, here we go!

The post transcodes some signals, this time from 24-bit deep 96kHz to 32-bit float 48kHz, and then [almost] back, to 32-bit float 96kHz.
It goes on to tell us, teh musical scholarz, with wordses and purty pictures, that there is no fucking audible difference.

Picture:

Words:​

This picture shows both the spectrum and the waveform of the difference signal. As can be seen there is virtually no difference below 20 kHz.

The learned author errs on the side of caution; -195dB is roughly equivalent to a flea farting during the launch of Saturn V rocket, which, dear reader, registered 204dB in a test conducted by NASA's clever musicologists.

See how much more useful (and fun!) reading becomes when someone explains things 2 u?

And also about Trump. Neither one of these interesting debates has anything whatsoever to do with DAWs. Let's stay focused

​

 

Last edited: Nov 30, 2017