Your answer was in the "if". Let's just say you have heard this horn sections work across various US, UK, French & japanese.
Another artist was the originator of the east coast GoGo beat who is no longer with us. Just a few teasers.

 

Two EQ plugins opened in the DAW yield a different characteristic/color/degree of transparency even when both are supposedly set to flat. They interact differently with the DAW, cpu, graphics, ram, and have different latency figures.

Two DAWs (like plugins) are opened in the OS software. They yield a different characteristic/color/degree of transparency even when both are supposedly set to neutral. They interact differently with the OS, cpu, graphics, ram, and have different latency figures.

If some believe there is nothing relative between the two examples above.. and the difference in their interaction with the software they are launched inside of.. along with a chain of physical components they take different measures from has no identifiable bearing on the perception of sound.. so be it. Your perception isn't a game changer for yourself, and it won't deter the perspective of the more critical listeners out there.

Sound is not only characterized by amplitude. That is what some of you choose to totally neglect for the sake of arguing about what "you" can't detect a difference between. What amplitude constitutes clarity, transparency, or lack thereof? If your ears are locked-up in comparison to what others claim to notice, it's just more power to them. It's easy to argue your point.. just say you're not an Audiophile - Wikipedia and exit the conversation.

 

I don't have any more time to waste, either back up your claims by posting something you've worked on with some proof or stop inflating your ego on something that can't be proven.
I honestly can live without knowing who you're involved with, as if you're the only one working in the industry.

 

'
Yeah, it is. Sound is characterised by amplitude over time/voltage over time/air pressure over time. There is absolutely nothing else that a DAC/your amp/your speakers deal with, it's the nature of sound.
Failing to grasp elemental shit -- basics understood by school children -- that led you to ...this :|

Time to take it to the next level. Real pros cryogenically treat their usb cables & keep their 'puter boxen inside led-lined orgone generators (to exclude the strong force from attracting caustic mu meson radiation & declarifying the mix).

 

I said "amplitude".. 1 word.. is not the only thing sound is characterized by. Amplitude is: The maximum extent of a vibration or oscillation, measured from the "position of equilibrium".

That means how "strong" the signal is, and nothing more. Amplitude does not depict frequency or shit else. Two totally different sounds can have the same amplitude. I wouldn't even advise a little keyboard gangster like you to go back to school. I hope you stay at the level you're on. And it looks like someone loves what you said because they thought too soon.. or because they love to see you make a fool of yourself and be wrong.

 

Last edited: Dec 1, 2017

So... what you were trying to say is "sound is not just the maximum extent of vibration"? That Houses of the Holy != Fur Elise, played at the same volume? Huh, and all this time...whod'a thunked!

 

Well you know what they say about people like yourself who don't take things seriously.. they're half-ass at every thing they do.

 

Doesn't answer my question. I'll repeat:
So... what you were trying to say is "sound is not just the maximum extent of vibration"? That Houses of the Holy != Fur Elise, played at the same volume?

Is that what we fail to do, grasp the difference between a piano and a fog horn, when both are at the same SPL?
This is so interesting, as if the scales have fallen from my eye! Do tell me more about myself.

 

You are starting to remind me of Donald Trump. Attack, attack, attack. Don't give an inch on you position at all costs.

Have never had to inflate my ego even when people like Forbes thought I was the spokes person in one situation. Just pointed Jr. in the right direction & carried on.

 

Noticed that most top mixers/engineers consolidate tracks for overall management including headroom.

 

The Donald Trumpet, smoke blowin, YouTube warrior, Twitter bigot type of characters manage to show up in every forum with that childish shit.. just hoping to get laughs from the other rotten children.

 

Last edited: Dec 1, 2017

Whelp, you've proven your expertise in one thing -- not answering direct questions. Mine or his.
Piqued my curiosity, so did some interweb sleuthing ...this you making some magic, Golden Ears?

Like laughing at teh differently-enabled: unsporting and just plain mean.

 

I've literally laughed my ass off when reading their replies, honestly they are the only ones seeing attacks, and rightfully so: when you can't back up your claim you play the victim card.

>have never had to inflate my ego
>people like Forbes thought I was the spokes person in one situation

make up your mind, and pick one.

Anyway since there haven't been any significant reply proving lamb wrong, "discussing" on this matter with fairy tales and shit like "b-b-but I'm important, forbes once thought I was a spokeperson" ( ) doesn't bring anywhere.
Get back on topic and bring actual numbers and examples you have the knowledge to discuss, or just quit it because it's pathetic. Thanks.

 

There has been info put foward which has been poopooed every time. Just reinstalled Pro Tools and updated S1 3, made sure all thrre DAWs
are set to their default of 44.1kHz, 24bit to start.

Lambchop seems to be the pulling everyone off topic by constant slurs and such.

Remeber when I first joined in 2011 that there was another member doing the same thing. Is it the same person under a different persona?

Just in case you missed it, the follwing site offers DAW comparissons at the digital level and, if referred to by many pro & teaching institutions alike. Check it out! http://src.infinitewave.ca/

 

Jesus christ I know what src artifacts are and I've known that website for years, did you even read the whole thread? Do you even have a basic understanding of how sample rate conversion works or you just want to clinge on that single thing because that's the only thing your google search brought up when looking for daw differences?

Did you bother looking at the dB scale of these tests you keep bringing up? Since you keep bringing up these tests you might as well read the rest http://src.infinitewave.ca/faq.html

Src artifacts are hardly audible, and even several iterations of up/downsampling can be easily masked by the slightest quantization. Are you able to hear src artifacts on real life material? That would be fucking hilarious.

By running null tests from downsampled or upsampled material you get imperfect nulls, obviously, but it doesn't mean two daws sound different from an audibility standpoint (which is, again, what the thread is about).
If you think this subject is relevant to the discussion you must be the kind of person that changes sample rate while tracking in the same project.

Simply avoid working with different sample rates, in ANY daw avoiding up/downsampled material is the better choice.

 

Clearly I was mistaken & would now like to retract that tinfoil hat paranoid conspiracy nutter bit.
Please disregard my little faux pas & continue to masterfully not answer direct questions & throwing fresh new shit at the wall. Sooner or later, some's bound to stick

Coo coo ca choo,

Your friend, My_name_is_Legion

 

I have cubase and ableton. If I load stems into both with no plug-ins, then bounce out, cubase seems to do a better job when bouncing. if I then add chains of the same 3rd party plug-ins, there is not much difference when playing back in each DAW, but as soon as I bounce out there's a difference, and cubase always sums better, and that is with both DAWs set to the best/same export settings. Don't listen to others repeating what they read on the internet, do your own tests and decide for yourself.

 

You are right about Abelton. Just can't get around the sound compared to other DAWs. I the SCR comparisons from the site I referred to,
Abelton is one of the worst performers in all tests.

Doing my own tests with vst signal/noise generators and audiophile grade test files. S1 and Reaper are close so far. Many test to go.
Thought it be a few hours, more like a few days. Pro Tools has some strange things happening in the lows & highs.

 

Would you mind to back up this claim with proof?

 

So you're running SRC tests to demonstrate what, exactly? That if you're changing sample rates on a test tone you'll read (and not hear) small harmonic distortion at less than -160dBFS (in Pro tools, Ableton live 9, Studio one and Reaper)??
Wow, good fucking job mate. It's like getting an assignment that asks you to talk about WW2 but you start talking about rifles instead.

You know, you can actually contribute and demonstrating that the rest of us is wrong by running some useful tests instead of redundant ones that other people have already ran and which don't demonstrate anything of value related to this thread's title
And I'm making the generous assumption that you're even doing these tests and not bullshitting us. But I guess we won't see any actual proof of that, right?

Fucking lol'd.