@ lysergyk the point i was trying to make or ask etc is purely an Audio Question.

midi isn't in question, unless you can hear midi data hehe

Seriously tho, and it may seem i'm getting off the subject but, to many magazines and forums etc all say this is better etc etc, i will use a basic example and a very important one, when was the last time you actually seen a magazines or forum's talk about what quality the DAW had in the Recording stage regardless of Audiocard (thats another subject) reason i say regardless is if you use the same Audiocard in an A+B test you should then if the thought of most people is true, you should hear no difference between A+B DAW.

All we see in most cases is "i loaded files into blah blah package and it sounded great it was a joy or it wasn't a joy to work with"

Also we always hear how Protools is great or a must have to mix in, they never or rarely say what they tracked in (Recorded in), i hope this may give a little bit more of an understanding of what i was trying to convey, without going into a long drawn out procedure.

Cheers

 

Hi guys,
forum is good for audioz ;)
i prefer cubase for Daw
cheers

 

live in your own small world with the teletubbies and believe everything someone posts in the mighty internet. Be a sheep and be happy

 

i dont think that you know what a brain is the little sausage between your legs is not called brain.

there is so many code in every DAW you think that every DAW does the same in the same way so every manufacturerer share his code with the other companies so that they all can sound the same way? if this is what your brain tells you then, try living without it... cause it is totally bullshit. Never ever possible that all the companies use the same code in every DAW to do the same, maybe they use the same principiles but they will have realized it in a different way... so there are differences maybe little ones but its never possible that 5-6 companies code their software the same way. so no go and debatte that with your brain.

 

im not the only one who believes his ears so the other 2 guys here also have no brain??? i cant explain why but pro tools and sonar x1 has sofar the best sound. for me it is not important what some guys say or post, as long as my ear tells me something different. and a musician should trust at first his ears cause this is the first choice of tools for him. but you post so many videos and publication cause you wanna believe they are all the same, maybe you sould spent more time with making music and then your ears would be better trained and you would stick to use them... only my 2 cents.

sorry saint for my posts but the 2 guys pissing me off, i have my own opinion in this one and i dont like sheep people who believes everything that other people tell them.

I did a blind test with 3 daws, importing an wave file and played it back in all of the 3 daws, remember a blind test so i was not placebo convinced...

cheers

 

This is becoming really ridiculous and almost absurd here.

@ suchenderxxx

You should really dig into the subject, instead of believing that your ears and you yourself are the holy grail of music production.
Why do you think that short comparisons you did, under anything but optimal conditions, without using any scientific methods, have any kind of significance???

Sorry to disappoint you, but they don't. The human senses and appreciation are very easy to bluff, by the slightest of factors we aren't aware of, so they are not reliable tools.
This a fundemantal truth discovered already by the great Greek philosophers 2500 years ago.

Believing that something has to be like you claim, just because you think you can hear it, is like believing to be God.
It is simply irrational, or should I say nearly mental.

Bring some proof, but all "proof" you have brought so far, are the reference to your ears. Great.

Thanks for this great link.
I think I might assume correctly, that most people here haven't get the patience or even the will to read this article, so let me allow to quote a selection of the (in my opinion) most important conclusions:

- Today, from a transparency perspective all DAW software is created equal. If you do hear some difference then it's coming from a setting, effect or option somewhere (numbered and discussed below) not from some inherent quality of the 'audio engine'.

- A second and more important cause is the many settings and options that can affect the live and rendered audio from any DAW. Its unlikely that 'out of the box' any two DAWs will make exactly the same sound.

- It's almost guaranteed that the same track rendered from any two DAWs will be a few dB different and so this is the most common cause of the 'DAW wars'.

- We are talking here basic mathematics (addition, subtraction and division), there is no magic, there are no secret things that some DAW manufacturers know that others don't.

- What matters most is mixing skill & performance. Both these 'essential elements' come from humans not the technology.

- You can't make an unbiased comparison of the audio from two sources, A and B, if you know what source you are listening to at any given time.



suchenderxxx, and all of you guys convinced to hear differences between DAWs because you made a 20 min comparison, please take the time and read the whole article linked above. Thanks.
As you will see, they can be audible differences between DAWs, but the reasons for that are explained well in the article.

 

I never said you (or others) had no brain. I said TRUST IT, after reading evidences and making your own NULL TEST (not a supposed blind test with two files... and a girlfriend) instead of believing your ears. Now if you feel more comfortable by insulting people than taking the time to read and learn, it's up to you men : it will not hurt me at all, so go ahead.

If you had taking the time to read what Ableton and Image-Line's engineers had written, you would probly understood that's exactly the case : they're ALL working in 32 bit (internal processing), plus there is only one way to proceed a digital summing operation. And if you believe it's not the case, so please tell me why they're saying that all DAWs sounds the same ? It will be better, in a commercial point of view, to pretend that their own DAW sounds better than the competition, isn't it ?

I'm perfectly aware that I piss you off, and I'm really sorry for that. But it will be always the case with people who have nothing to argue - except their own unfounded opinion - in front of scientific evidences.

Enjoy your best sounding DAW.

Cheers,
LG

 

so gullivere you believed that there is no difference between 44,1 khz and 96khz sampling frequencies... there was also a difference....

like i said i did a blind test and i was able to hear differences also my girlfriend did hear the same differences, hear ear is very well trained she plays accoustic instruments in a band for many years now. and this test is more worth for me. it is very suprising that no engineer from steinber or avid tells the people that all daws sounds the same... why? only these underdogs doing this they will tell the people that these daws sounds the same like the big players in the business. so what is the point that all professionall mixing engineers and producers use pro tools? i never have seen an top engineer working with fl studio or ableton...

 

interesting, thanks

 

ok saint, im outta here. sorry but i was pissed of by these guys who joking around with their arrogant attitude... i know all these publications but you must be open minded....

 

@ suchenderxxx

The only one with an arrogant attitude are you here, so far.
All other people try to explain, bring a lot of arguments and examples, and you don't even react to any of that.
You just repeat the same again and again, YOU can hear something, and period.

Why you don't react to any of our (and a lot of experts')arguments???
If this is your discussion style, then you really starting to piss me off as well, and should go better elsewhere, like you said.

I knew you will bring that up.
You "forgot" to mention that I said that the 44,1 Khz example sounded much clearer.

And here is the reason for that:
"Playing back a 44.1 kHz sample at any other sampling rate then 44.1 needs interpolation. This changes the sound."

You can't make a 44,1 kHz sample sounding better at a higher sampling rate, by any means.
Taking such an example as a "proof" for 96 kHz sounding better in general, doesn't need to be commented anyway. It is just ridiculous.

But anyway you just read want you want to, what fits into your theories.
And you call yourself "open minded"?
That's the exact opposite, what you do.

 

yeah i understand what you mean but in this case they are all the same...because the quality doesnt
depend on the DAW but on the AD/DA converters of your audio interface...as you put it before they just stock
0s and 1s...however and that comes back to what we were talking about earlier in the thread, they will
not all sound the same when they read your file..even though the nuance is a slight one..and not really
worth bothering about in most cases IMHO

as to reviews, you are probably aware of the fact that most of them are "bought" and very few reviews are
actually being objective, in so far as it is possible to be so, (and also everybody has different needs so
everybody has his idea of how a DAW should be like)

i dont want to start a flame thread but I think protools is great IF you have the dedicated hardware coming with it
(and that's why it's a standard)...otherwise, it's just a different way of working which may or may not suit you...

 

that's for sure lol, how would you get something that is not there in the beginning...the same goes with instruments...
if you miss some frequencies in a bass recording, using all the EQs in the world will never make them appear whatsoever!

 

Yes, but nobody on earth is able to ear that difference.
EDIT : This of course without any downsampling/upsampling from or to 96 and 44,1 kHz.

Mate, you're falling deeper and deeper... :

http://forum.nuendo.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=11328

Check post n° 6 and 11 :

1. because Pro Tools sounds better and all the folks who works with Ableton and FL are stupid amateurs.
2. because stupid amateurs prefer to COMPOSE and/or PRODUCE with Ableton or FL, and then send their works for MIXING and/or MASTERING in a big studio equipped with Pro Tools. Different tools for different tasks...
3. Make your choice

BTW, the more you're asking such questions, the more it becomes evident that you're a little noob in the business...

 

you forget to mention the most important...THEY HAVE THE HARDWARE THAT COMES WITH IT!
pro tools isnt just a sotfware...

 

so all of you are be able to work with pro tools but you guys prefer working with fl studio cause it is the same...
why these guys does not use fl studio for mixing if the same summing apears and the sound is the same... so please tell these the big studios so they know these great news and they can spent the money in fl studio for professional mixing

 

Maybe there are other aspects, which are relevant for the decision for or against a specific DAW, then the "audio engine"?

Hmmmmm.....

 

Yes, of course *yes*
Pro Tools becomes a standard because of its DSP cards which was essential in the past, when computers was unable to manage a large quantity of plug-ins. Thanks to our modern processors, it's not the case anymore, but clients continues to believe in the "superiority" of Pro Tool's platform, so...

 

so these clients are not able to read these publication? and look these funny videos? and they dont have a internet so they can get the actual "knowledge" like you pros