We have and they don't null, we traced it to the fact PARIS was custom DSP based

Lets start with some basic logic.

Sound is a vibration that propagates as an acoustic wave.
Hearing, or auditory perception, is the ability to perceive sounds through an organ, such as an ear, by detecting vibrations as periodic changes in the pressure of a surrounding medium.

Thus NOBODY here has ever heard a DAW without a processor computing math, or converters turning computed math into voltage, that's then converted to vibrations via headphones or speakers of some sort, that are perceived through ears. So do all DAWs sound the same... no, do all DAWs compute math the same, yes if coded properly.

The logical fallacy here is simple, we don't hear math being computed, we hear the sum of converters, processing, coding,and some sort of headphones or speakers. The sum of all this makes a sound we hear.

Yes, DAW's sound different.
Yes, DAW's compute math the same.
No, not all DAW's are coded the same.

Zero of this has anything to do with musical expression.

 

Impulse Tracker (1995) source code, previously made open source on BitBucket in 2014 but now gone, is now hosted on GitHub by its creator Jeffrey Lim --> www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1dh1dsh/impulse_tracker_1995_source_code_previously_made

Impulse Tracker was remarkably advanced for its time (1995–1998). It offered:

High-quality interpolation: Impulse Tracker used sinc interpolation or similar algorithms, which minimized aliasing and artifacts during pitch shifting. Many hardware samplers of the era (e.g., early AKAI or Roland models) used simpler linear interpolation, which resulted in audible artifacts at extreme transpositions. Flexibility: As a software application, Impulse Tracker was not bound by the hardware limitations of samplers (e.g., limited RAM or processor power).

 

It is well known that digital audio waves (samples) can sound different depending on the context, DAW, signal processing, or even playback engine, even if they should theoretically be identical. Factors such as resampling algorithms, dithering, aliasing, internal signal flow architecture, or even minimal differences in the DAW engine can cause samples to sound different.

Digital audio waves (samples) can indeed sound different even if they should theoretically be identical, as various technical factors such as resampling algorithms, dithering, aliasing, and the internal signal flow architecture of DAWs or playback engines can influence the sound.

Resampling algorithms are particularly influential: Since audio data often needs to be converted to a uniform format (e.g., 48 kHz/16 bit), the signal is recalculated (resampled).

This can lead to minimal changes in the sound and even rounding errors – even if no audible artifacts arise, the data no longer corresponds exactly to the original. Even volume changes in the mixer can influence the sound due to constant resampling. Depending on the quality of the resampling algorithm, artifacts and tonal differences can arise, especially when the sampling rate is changed and is not an integer multiple.

Dithering is used when the audio format reduces the bit depth (e.g., from 24 to 16 bits). It helps to psychoacoustically minimize rounding and quantization errors by adding noise that masks disturbing artifacts. Dithering should be used especially during format conversion, as internal DAWs often work with longer word lengths (e.g., 32-bit floating point) to minimize quality loss.

Aliasing occurs when frequencies above the Nyquist frequency (half the sampling rate) are not filtered correctly and have a negative impact on the sound. Anti-aliasing filters are built in by default, but when selecting the sampling rate, the filter's slope plays a role in sound quality. Oversampling during processing can help reduce visible/audible aliasing by temporarily increasing the sampling rate before downsampling the sound.

The internal signal flow architecture and engine implementation of a DAW or playback software can cause minimal differences due to different calculation precision, rounding mechanisms, or plug-in implementations. Some DAWs calculate with more bits internally and use different summing and processing methods, which can result in slight sonic variations.

In summary: Even theoretically identical digital samples can vary due to technical factors such as resampling, dithering, aliasing filtering, or different software engines. These influences are usually minor and often only detectable in critical listening situations or with high-quality comparison methods.

 

of course, different versions of DAWs sounds different

 

Here's the definitive test that will with absolute certainty prove that all DAWs sound different. Say each slowly and succinctly three times. If you hear any DAW sound the same as any other DAW on the list then you need both your hearing checked as well as a good psychiatrist.

Studio One
FL Studio
Pro Tools
Cubase
Reaper
Abelton
Sequoia
Logic
Reason
GarageBand
Audition

Case closed!!


PS .. I didn't watch the video.