https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_law

 

@Ted Smithton
The according to you (no offense taken btw) "funny" bit, meant that if you do this you will find there is a noticeable difference from DAW to DAW. The example of the many tracks will show that each DAW handles what is perceived as absolute silence or maximum peak before digital distortion, somewhat differently when it calculates the sum of totally different in volume audio channels.
Why many channels and not one ? Because you have to push the algorithm to do some complicated math in order to be able to re-produce the aforementioned different "behavior". One channel equals the same as none in this paradigm.
PS: The minimum/maximum panning (as mentioned) is also translated slightly differently from DAW to DAW when rendering many channels which include complex panning to a stereo file.

 

I only did that test because dbmuzik said do it and you will hear a difference. Cause he was saying that a daw handles the rendering of a loop different and you can hear that differnces. I never heared (or saw) a difference in a single exported track. Because i never heared it, does not mean there could be a subtitle difference and I can only hear it if i do a null or side by side test. Again I never setup a huge project side by side and compared it. The biggest project i swaped between daws for years are my (roundabout 12 track) drum recordings - and theese are not summed.

There might be a differnce if you summ up 40 tracks - I meantioned that i dont know this.

But if there is such a difference and i want setup a test for myself this should show an audible difference or am I wrong? ...

If i mixdown a ~20 track project in 2 different daws (no effects nothing just summing) and import them in a 3 rd daw, and render that tracks in that 3 rd daw. I should still be able to hear a difference right ?

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 22, 2017

Its a subject that is as subjective as it is objective. I would say it comes closer to a real test, though working in a daw for days and switching between them is imo different than a quick comparison with 40 tracks. The difference is not night and day, for me its more about the overall characteristics of the sound, hard to explain.

 

But this seems than more a psycological phenomenom? You "see something new you hear something new"?
If you are used to see the clean, bright, colourfull gui of cubase and than switch to lets say s1 which has dark and pastel colours you hear the sound going from - more clean - neutral to "more dark - warm - depth" sounding?

Than reaper is the way to go - with all that themes

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 22, 2017

As @TW said, this is the test OP suggested we conduct. We did. The results can be seen from ~30 sec screencaps, and seem conclusive.

The problem with 40 tracks/working for days test is legion, for they are many.

Watch at least the second vid in @momo's link:

The music used is ...neither here nor there, but the info solid & doesn't take a doctorate in rocket surgery to grasp.
Other than the psych stuff @TW just mentioned [which the vid covers -- pretty convincing], 40 tracks in 40 days on 40 DAWs will virtually guarantee experimenter error. When taking my first screencap, I clicked the invert button and -- faint something, not silence. WTF. Turns out I hit one of the faders -- couldn't see it, but clicked "reset" to restore it to the default position, and ...as expected. Now multiply that by 40 tracks, and that by etc., and you got trash.

TL;DR:
1. the tests have to be objective -- quantifiable/falsifiable
2. the number of variables under test has to be exactly 1 (the linked vid covers that too). if you are looking for summing errors in 40 tracks (summing 2 audio bitstreams is literally binary addition, nothing else), do a test with 2 tracks, and extrapolate from there (If 2 DAWs sum 2 tracks identically, they'll sum 3 - 3000 tracks identically, unless one's broken).

 

Last edited: Nov 22, 2017

For roughly the same reason that all calculators made by different companies give the same result: they do basic math. Blips and bloops.
inb4: "but if you do 40 different calculations in a row, on 40 different calculators": same deal.

 

No they don't sound the same........null tests are just a part of the story.

 

Unless you feel that DAWs use dark Gypsy magiks (thereby being outside of/inaccessible to math, logic, and rational analysis)? Yes, that's the whole story.

 

i once tried remaking an FL song with Live

It sounded quite different with the same plugins, settings and midi

dont know why.

 

Thats your story.....

 

It's OK to feel that everything's subjective,

 

Hahahaha.....you are so funny.......and thats not subjective.

 

No, not all DAW sound the same; and yes, all are digital, but all codes and engineering form are different. The simply test, make a own song, export stems and mix in all DAW that you have access all with their native plugins and exactly the same parameters in EQs, Comp, Etc., export all versions to a 48Khz WAV and test one by one blinded, and my be you can note the differences.

 

yeah go ahead and blind test calculators. jesus fucking christ is math that hard to get?

however native plugins may be coded differently and may sound differently,i give you that.

 

Its ok if you can't hear it....just trust the null tests.....after all your name is <<notapro>>

 

When I load a project I made in Fruity Loops yesterday into Fruity Loops today, it sounds totally different. True fact.
Ergo, Fruity Loops doesn't sound the same as Fruity Loops.

>with their native plugins
Won't lie, native plugs are different.

 

If you exclude the use of stock plugins (duh) and SRC artifacts they SHOULD sound the same because math is math, in a digital context we're always summing signals and as far as professional softwares go the difference between two finished products is definitely not audible.
Who claims to be able to recognize by ear the product of two different workstations is simply a liar and most likely will favor the software he endorses.
The process that leads to the finished product involves the human factor which is what really makes the difference and the fact DAWs have different workflows and meters is the most important factor to take into account when we compare two products. In this case, audible differences are simply led by human actions.
As Olaf pointed out, if a software sounds different it's not a good software, we are using DIGITAL audio workstations for a reason, if we want a certain workstation to give its own sound we would use emulations and software weighted differently where "sounding different" (and not "better") is an intrinsic quality of said software.
Otherwise the daw you are using sounds different you're using a poorly coded software that doesn't do what it's supposed to.

 

What a shitstorm about nothing, I only know one daw Samplitude.

 

That's the point, dude. They are native plugins and they behave differently compared to other daws'.