You guys will get a kick out of this thread
Home > Home Recording Forum > Recording Techniques > You guys will get a kick out of this thread
Jan 10, 2007 10:08 pm Well, while I appreciate your efforts, you are wrong in the sound quality...I can record at the same bit and sample rate in different versions of software and it can sound very different. Actually, the reason I switched to Cakewalk products when Sonar 1 came out was specifically because their audio engine improved. In my opinion, before Sonar, Cakewalk sound quality sucked ***. 44.1/16bit in Sonar sounded like crap, in Cubase it didn't...
zekthedeadcowEat Spam before it eats YOU!!!Member
Since: May 11, 2002
Jan 10, 2007 10:13 pm there was an informal study by one of the 'big' guys as homerecording.com... he actually went out and bought all of the available software... all of them were the same...except I think neuendo... which played back 5db softer... but it mixed down the same...
I was almost hoping Walters made a return somplace...
LokiCone PokerMember
Since: Apr 07, 2002
Jan 10, 2007 10:15 pm ooooh god. That was terrible. Listen to him though, he's a recording engineer and we're just hobbyists.
Jan 10, 2007 10:25 pm It had to be incredibly informal, because there is no way on earth thats true, I have thru the years played with every damn recording app out there and while the upper end ones are similar, they are not the same. Not a chance...there is no way on earth I will ever believe that, I have heard it with my own ears.
...even though I am just a hobbiest...
absolutely, positively, 100% genuinely not true.
GeoffSM7b the Chuck Noris of Mic'sContributor
Since: Jun 20, 2002
Jan 10, 2007 10:40 pm the good ol PT vs the world debate. both parties are a little wrong as dB pointed out. PT LE and M powered have the name but are not up there with the big PT setup. PT is a good program and work well but calling it the best is a streach, especially LE or M powered. Now it's better than soem of the freeware. PT can easily be said to be in most studios, but..so is Logic, Cubase, Nuendo and Sonar to name a few. Hell Sonar 6 has been making a lot of press and winning awards left and right , so to call PT the only good app is just plane stupid . Just like say PT's is garbage ,it's not. I did think that this cat thought PT and waves were the only things to get, waves has some great plug ins (hell i have a bunch) but they cost a butt load and now (if you buy them now) you have to pay to keep using them which sucks.
zekthedeadcowEat Spam before it eats YOU!!!Member
Since: May 11, 2002
Jan 10, 2007 11:28 pm your mom!
LokiCone PokerMember
Since: Apr 07, 2002
Jan 11, 2007 12:14 am are you drunk zek?
GeoffSM7b the Chuck Noris of Mic'sContributor
Since: Jun 20, 2002
Jan 11, 2007 02:29 pm I think he at some bad spam.
CptTrippsCzar of Turd PolishMember
Since: Jun 20, 2006
Jan 11, 2007 02:50 pm Adobe Audition 2.0 - LOVING IT!!!
meltdown5Faze 2 StudiosMember
Since: Aug 15, 2005
Jan 11, 2007 02:53 pm Windows "Sound Recorder" - LOVING IT!!!
zekthedeadcowEat Spam before it eats YOU!!!Member
Since: May 11, 2002
Jan 11, 2007 02:53 pm just shortening the arguement...
protools is better, no it's worse, they're all the same, it's expensive, i'm poor, use kazaa, it's pretty, it's ugly, your mom, nuh uh, bush did it... etc. :)
CptTrippsCzar of Turd PolishMember
Since: Jun 20, 2006
Jan 11, 2007 02:59 pm Hahaha, my favorite lines are these.... Where he says he hasn't used it, but that it's not easy.
"You know what, if you can find logic or cubase (I haven't used, so I won't comment) buy it."
"I don't know if you've ever tried mixing in logic, but it's not as easy."
BeerHunterwww.TheLondonProject.caMember
Since: Feb 07, 2005
Jan 11, 2007 03:05 pm Well ya know a good buddy of mine swears by PT but he is constantly bitching at the availability of plug-ins. There aren't really very many free ones. There are 1,000's of free VST's on the other hand. Comparisons like PT vs the rest can become outdated very quickly. Software from all the major players has come such a long way in the last few years. So much so that it is truly giving analog a run for its money. Personally I think digital is better than analog from a production or getting the job done point of view and everyday its getting closer from a sound perspective as well.
In the end what really matters (to me anyway) is getting the job done quickly and professionally. If it sounds great then it is great. I have found that a lot of arguments regarding PT (or even analog) have to do with defending their large financial investments. You won't find anyone that is quick to accept the fact that a $1,000 setup can sound as good as a $10,000 setup. No one wants to be labeled a sucker.
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
Jan 11, 2007 05:05 pm The whole PT vs. the world debate will never end. As long as there are those that think that the more you spend the better it is that will be the PT mantra.
I have used just about all of the apps out there as well and have for many years. Funny how I do Pro recording and keep sticking with Sonar. I don't here any of my clients bitching that I should have used PT instead. And my music used in commercials around the world doesn't seem to be any less attractive because I didn't use PT.
I ran Sonar and Cubase both for a few years as I needed to to be able to work with differant clients. Now Sonar is the only tool I will use other then SoundForge and WaveLab. And Project 5 as well. The audio engine in Sonar and P5 is now one of the best and fastest most stable audio engines available. They have done their homework and are ready to be used in the 64 bit realm and have been long before the other even started thinking about it. They worked side by side with Microsoft to be able to do this and I applaud them for their forward thinking. My hopes are now that they will stay just that little step ahead of the others and keep my software on the cutting edge.
A side note as well. I don't see any other software maker tossing in the high quality pluggins that Cakewalk offers in their Producer edition. Stienberg and the others don't even come close to handing out what Cakewalk does on that level.
But that said, indeed there are huge differances in the audio engines of differant software. Some may not notice the differance, but I know I make it a habit of listening for these things.
zekthedeadcowEat Spam before it eats YOU!!!Member
Since: May 11, 2002
Jan 12, 2007 07:51 am I have so far watched 2 divorces and a murder over the internet... the murder was creepy as ****.. because we didn't know until a month or so later.
neoificIdiot KidMember
Since: Sep 27, 2006
Jan 12, 2007 10:04 am I like where this is goin.
Giggety giggety GIG ET Y
Seems that I can't embed images. What a shame.
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Jan 12, 2007 11:11 am So what differences are there between the mixdowns of one piece of software and another? Specifically what sounds different between them?
And were ALL of the other variables the same when you've heard these differences? Like take the same, untreated WAV file, load it into Sonar and load it into ProTools. Add no effects or other treatments, mix it down to the same bit resolution and sample rate, and you actually hear a difference in the files?
Jan 12, 2007 11:15 am The final product sounds different, what else matters? I used different software in my own studio, same mics or direct recording devices...and I have gotten VERY different results.
Jan 12, 2007 12:20 pm I've only had any mentionable experience with CEP, and now Adobe Audition, so I can't offer any intelligent comparison. But you can't miss what you never had, right?
I'm quite happy with my results. They can have Pro Tools. Besides, I'm a cheap SOB. :-}
Jan 12, 2007 01:03 pm I have, side by side, compared Sonar, Vegas, ProTools Free, Cubase and a few lesser knowns, back when Cakewalk's flagship product was called "Cakewalk" their sound sucked *** on my set up, it was thin and weak, Cubase smoked it, Vegas was good as well...Cakewalk redid their audio engine from the ground up for their new "Sonar" product and I could without any effort hear the difference.
There damn sure IS a difference in the sound of software. As the technology develops they are all getting good so the gap is surely closing though.
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Jan 12, 2007 01:28 pm OK, that's basically what I wanted to know.
I can imagine that in their early years, there could have been big differeces. But I really can't imagine taking the same data, running it through any of the current major audio engines and ending up with anything noticeably different. Any current software that wouldn't pass that test certainly wouldn't sell.
Now the one big thing that ProTools has is that it usually comes with their nice digi- or MBox units, that have excellent preamps and A/D converters. Now those, I would fully concede make a huge difference. So when somebody "steps up to a ProTools rig" like that fella said, they're getting a package of stuff that all will result in a big improvement over some Tascam analog 4-track that they were using the integrated mic on or something.
Jan 12, 2007 01:30 pm Oh, sure, you start tossing hardware into the equation, yeah, whole different playing field then...also different ticket price...
Flashmannot the brightest spark...Member
Since: Sep 13, 2005
Jan 12, 2007 02:30 pm Big up Audition!
