thanks

 

the lengths some people are prepared to go just to avoid confronting the very basics.

worried about the cables, the daws internal coding, the latest update. everything just not simply make a tune and learn the freaking ropes

 

Oh, you speak of THE daw. I won 69 grammy awards thanks to THAT daw. It gives my mixes all the punch, warmth and 4th dimensional feeling of awarded records from awarded warm awards, indeed.

 

First rule of THAT daw: You don’t talk about THAT daw

And we've already said too much in here

 

Because there are THOUSAND threads on the subject since DAWs where created

Just read all that ... and die before REALLY using your DAW
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=daw+sound+engine+comparison

 

It seems that everyone is born knowing here. That no one has the right to investigate and make mistakes. Once again they troll a question from someone who doesn't know. All some time this doubt or some other. And what is the point of resisting these questions? showing that they are smarter? wiser? Who would want to ask something, if here there are super geniuses who were born knowing everything and when there is someone who does not know, instead of helping they make fun of him. Perfect! keep it up, all you do is make people leave.

 

Ignore the trolls, they just want to be noticed.

I will tell you my experience.
Many years ago with a friend we had your same doubt, and we were just using Cubase 5, then we had to continue using Cubase 5 or Studio one as an alternative, and we wondered if the sound changed. We did many tests and even with other Daws, and never we found differences in the sound. Do not worry about it, look for the Daw that is easier for you to work

 

It is NOT about "trolling", it is about wondering "DO ppl ALREADY asked the same question for decades ?"
5 seconds web search gives you 10 pages

And i already gave my "troll" answer as first answer

 

Yes, and surely people will continue to be done, for many reasons, not just for not looking.
It may be that the answers you have found do not suit you, you do not understand well, or you need more friendly people to explain to you what the doubt you have is like.
You will keep wondering what is a compressor, what is an equalizer, etc.
Maybe you want the answer of the members here because you find it interesting, trust or feel comfortable.
Sometimes I don't understand why it's so hard to be kind to the other. I don't really get it.

 

People often debate about this without actually understanding how DAWS work, but the truth is that the actual difference between the sound of DAWS can be attributed to a few factors:

1. Summing algorithms: This can vary from program to program, or version to version. Of course if you just pop in an unprocessed WAV into different DAWs and press play, they will all sound the same, but when you start modifying the WAV file, and or summing several channels together, (especially pushing the levels of each individual channel closer or above 0-dbfs) you will start to hear the difference.

The difference is essentially in how a DAW is coded to handle distortion of mix busses, or the summing of individual channels. This is why some DAWS appear to have 'a sound'. Also during mixing when using plugins, the amount of 'mathematical precision' is determined by whether the mix engine is using 32 bit or 64 bit integers. 64 bit processing is more forgiving when dealing with rounding errors or messy gain staging. Pan laws to a lesser extent can be mistaken as a difference between DAWS.

2. Mix altering default settings: Some DAWS (like newer versions of Studio One) will have mix-altering settings enabled by default, such as 'dithering' enabled on playback and mixdown, (which I recommend turning off), dithering can cause an audible difference in the sound of a mix depending on the settings used. Another example of this type of 'mix-altering default-settings' is FL studio having the fruity limiter enabled on the master bus by default, or even Harrison Mixbus' overall design of being to emulate analog summing as a primary feature of the DAW.

In short, if a session is gain-staged properly, (mixing under 0-dbfs), using the same processing, and pan laws are set the same, most DAWS will sound the same. BUT if you are a sloppy with gain staging, you will start to see the how each DAW processes distortion, summing, and rounding errors differently.

Also, with sloppy gain staging the difference between 32 and 64 bit mix engines will also become more apparent.

So to answer your question, if your mix is gain staged wrong, newer versions of Cubase MAY sound better if using the 64 bit mix engine, or due to summing algorithm improvements in newer version of Cubase, BUT if your mixes were already gain staged properly in Cubase 5 you might not notice any significant differences.

 

Last edited: Aug 2, 2022

Not all DAWs are created equal most noticeably comparing Cubase11 to Ableton11 I am not affiliated with any DAW manufacturer so i can be honest and have nothing to gain, for those that would say audio quality is all the same well they either can't tell which i doubt or they are just being dishonest for what reason i can only guess.

 

Showing off that they red the rules. It's kind of a meme topic at this point.

 

I understand your point, but these are questions you can ask google, there is no need for a dedicated audio forum.
It's like asking:
-whats the best daw
-whats the best audio Monitor
-whats the best mic for studio
-what's the best sample pack for trap music
That's why there are people who "softly" trolling (including me)
Yes, maybe we are too harsh with beginners, sorry for that

 

And yes, it has been asked many times, and will continue to be asked, which is the best Daw? and yes, it is full of answers. But come on, many of us want the human response, from the other that is on the other side and tells you "if you look, for me it's better" this daw". Also, as I said before, and as silly as it may seem, many people come here because they feels somehow part of this. Imagine this, someone reads you and says Recycle seems to be a person who knows, I'm going to ask and boom you throw a humorous meme, do you know how it feels? past. I'm not saying that a little It's not good humor, but look, he said thanks to everyone who answered him and they said "it amuses me" that's totally ridiculous and doesn't help at all. To hell with those people who don't contribute anything. If one considers that already asked if you can share the thread, but a rain of memes and laughter. No friend, I do not agree at all.

 

i would say that anyone who says the audio quality of a daw is of any, even the slightest cosmic significance when making music is full of shit.

SPECIALLY when the people entertaining these thoughts are mostly, if not ALWAYS, people who struggle with putting four bars of midi in key over a drum-loop..


.

 

Last edited: Aug 3, 2022

Same in photography domain : how many amazing pictures where made with a Canon 5D Classic ?
It is a 2005 camera ... so WHAT ?

Should ppl throw away pictures made 20 years ago ? and throw away music made with Cubase 5 ?

Art is not limited by technology

5D Classic pic :
https://flic.kr/p/2nAXT5n

 

Why would you ever alter your midi parts to accommodate a sample? If I am going to change A 440 on all the synths, I'm going to delete the drum loop way before that. No?

 

DAWS do have their own unique sound actually. It's because the way their audio engines are written. Just to prove my point, add a multitrack in Sonar, Mixbus, Cubase and ProTools if you got. Make sure that everything is flat i.e. no eq or compressors active. You'll notice the difference in sound especially in the midrange.

 

If it is as you say. So could I see this difference on a spectrum analyzer? Or... with an eq match to show me what the difference is?

 

We all know the outcome of null tests. They prove little. You are attempting to compare very complex pieces of software and their internal processes by wether or not they play the same file the same way? Good luck.