try to get some decent mix using the Acid summing engine .... . it`s a daw as well right? I'm not talking about mixing 8 tracks. , ... try a decent mix on Acid on a complex project, with dozen tracks, several sub-groups, some duplicated tracks for parallel fx and sidechains .... anoying summing, phase issues everywhere.

 

Sorry its NOT nonsense, its just not well understood concept by most folks, even audio engineers. A DAWs "summing engine" has less to do with headroom and more to do with the representation and accuracy of the sound being reproduced by the DAW. This is further compounded by how fx plugins are calculated during mixing. So just playing back a pre-rendered audio file played at reasonable volumes would not produce a different result, BUT take a mix consisting of many tracks and many FX inserts and that may yield audible differences between 32/64 bit summing engines.

Here are a few links discussing the concept:

https://www.meterplugs.com/blog/2017/02/03/does-64-bit-summing-sound-better.html

https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/view...sid=c3f76bf48d7e2228bf071a965627ab66&start=15

https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=516055\

https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=501283

Even in the above links some will contend that the summing engine has no impact, but its obvious when you read their responses they don't even understand the details of what "summing calculations" are and how they affect audio.

My anecdotal experience is that when mixing on 64 precision enabled programs, I can get the desired sound with less effort. The But again this only pointed back to the fact that my gain staging was horrible and pushing the summing engine of a 32 bit summed DAW with a ton of fx and too much volume resulted in harsher less pleasing mixes... aka audible rounding errors. That was 10 years ago, and so I'm obviously much better about my gain staging today, so I wouldn't have the same issues even if using a 32 bit summing engine.

For all reasonable uses (unless pushed to extremes) the differences between most DAWs in 2020 would be subtle or practically non existent with proper gain staging, BUT on large projects (my projects were 100+ tracks) with many tracks averaging too close to 0dbsf, there IS a difference; but unless your ears are well trained I doubt 98% of people would notice.

I would do a real world test to prove it, but that would mean taking a session with 50+ tracks and 100+ live inserts fx and duplicating it in another DAW, and then null testing the results, and I'm just too busy at the moment. The pic below is a session of a song I just finished, as you can see the session has 291 tracks used (and about 500 fx inserts). But only about 60 tracks are live for the final mix playback.




Most people throw a WAV file in 2 different DAWS, then null test the output and immediately proclaim: "SEE IT NULLS"... but your method of testing was incorrect. Playing a single or unaffected audio file is a super simple calculation, but dail in a nice number of tracks and FX, and then set the same parameters for each DAW, and then let me know if the mix down from from each DAW nulls.

 

Last edited: Sep 29, 2020

Yes.

The trick is to make your daw, your daw at first.
Afther that, make it unique.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Sep 30, 2020

Exactly. Summing algorithms can make a difference. And those differences become more apparent the more complex the calculations the DAW needs to make.

 

Just to re-state what I said, all DAW's sound different, because they are coded differently,,not everyone here has the same listening enviroment. Not everyone here is using the same testing or doing the same mixes or following any standardised way. and FINALLY .... some people on this platform will have superhuman forensic hearing and a ton of professional experience, and some don't. Yes there are differences, but not everyone can hear them, for reasons listed above.This is just one of those debates that ends up going round and round and round because for obvious reasons (WE ARE NOT ALL THE SAME) It's about hearing. If you can't hear it then you can't hear it.

 

Pretty much this...But, that's not the whole story.What is important to remember is that EVERY operation in a daw/digital environment(even panning) is conducted in a way that the original 'signal" gets REPLACED.Meaning that in an a+b=c scenario both a and b will completely disappear and will be replaced by the result, c.That's how digital audio works and that's why phase "null" tests can could be conducted.
But it is also wrong to say that all daws sound the same and I'm not talking about intentionally "coloured" daws.There are MANY factors which could alter an internal result, for example how the daw communicate ( i.e drivers) with the OS and the "soundcard".
What can be disputed/debated is if the difference is significant enough to be counted and will have (or not) a significant impact on the.... intended result. Which is a personal choice based on personal experience.So....it is what it is.

 

Well I dispute that, even the Cubase reference. Cuibase artistic performance wise is MUCH more forgiving then other daws.....

 

Back to the thread title, kind of:
Not the daw as such, but the stock limiter?
Was watching MWTM #39 last week, and Jaycen Joshua said that whenever he gets work from producers that use Fruity Loops, the beats have a certain sound to them, which he reckons is because of Fruity Limiter.
And when he tries to emulate it, he uses this below on a buss with some other things.

 

It would be interesting if those who believe there are differences in daws, supported this theory by a practical demonstration: publish a video / tech sheet / datas ...
Otherwise there is no subject to discuss

 

I am 100% sure that you won't be able to hear any difference between them.
Just import, let's say 10 recorded 24-bit wave files and bounce it at the exact same level for all DAWs (be sure to disable any builtin limiting or dithering). Do your listening in a double blind test (ask someone to play them or randomize the filenames so you don't now which is which) ...and then do a null test if you wish.

Do NOT use any plugins, or at least not different plugins (like stock ones) since all of them will sound differently, of course.

Back in the day you could hear some things were made in Reason for instance, but that was only because their instruments and racks/plugins sounded a certain way...

 

I'm going to start a thread titled "Why do some DAWs sound so much better than others?"

 

If you able by hearing only what DAW is used of a Billboard song without knowing in advance what DAW was used, yes.

In other case stick only to one DAW and learn every thing you can learn about and compose the best song ever. Stop to looking for best sounding tools. Seek for creativity. We as composer try to find the best sound ever but most people hear their music with bad computer speakers or bad sounding headphones or using compressed (icall them lose format) formats like mp3.

 

If all DAWs sounded the same how come I found this science picture on the internet that shows how the brain reacts to the sound from each DAW. They used all the most expensive scanners that find all the cancer and can even reprogram your brain if you have had secret microchip implanted in you from visiting a dentist.

 

All off topic comments cleared.
Don't post about religion here, read the rules.

 

This forum definitely needs a "Religion, philosophy and metaphysics of sound & music"-section.

But back on topic, while a DAW intrinsically these days sounds pretty much the same as any other DAW, I'm working on a personal timewaster of a project where I produce a track each with a different DAW, ones that I've a) not really used and b) only using built-in/come-with plugins.

To me, the different approaches that need to be taken, and the different effects lead to different results.

 

You just can compare all of your DAWs' sound with the best software audio player in the world.
https://rsload.net/soft/player/17433-bug-head-emperor.html

 

Again guys, thread topic is Do all DAWs sound the same?
Nothing to do with religion...

Form here, please stay in topic. Keep you personal effusions for PM. and your socio politico religious debate for other places. There are plenty of them to "speak" about that.

Thanks in advance for respecting the members who visit this thread for it's title.

 

Strange to say it, but this time I agree with you

 

That would be me. sry lol

Don't remember. sry lol

I feel you bro!!

Careful!!! That's how Foster began his current path...
how about "Do androids dream of electric sheep?" ? Doesn't make sense either in a music forum but at least has style...

 

Is it possible to hear this mix somewhere? Would be interested.