So 0db center and +3db when panned left or right? Good to know.
"Reason sound" tested :)
Why feel the need to use the same VSTi for each DAW? Why not just use a sine wave sample? Sine waves are pure tones so after uploading the same sine wave sample through each DAW with no processing and exporting you could use a spectral graph to see if any thing was added to the pure tone? If you see anything other than the fundamental frequency of the sine wave you’ll know that the DAW colored the sound.
soundcloud.com/djfm1983
I think I explained that somewhere above, but the point was to also see if all DAWs process the VSTs in the same way. Comparing sine waves would be like comparing samples and I belive those tests were done to death already.djfm1983 wrote: ↑20 Jan 2019Why feel the need to use the same VSTi for each DAW? Why not just use a sine wave sample? Sine waves are pure tones so after uploading the same sine wave sample through each DAW with no processing and exporting you could use a spectral graph to see if any thing was added to the pure tone? If you see anything other than the fundamental frequency of the sine wave you’ll know that the DAW colored the sound.
Also, I wanted to avoid doing the "proper" null-test, because I think that even if there were so tiny differences, they could be inaudible to uman hearing, so even if it's not perfect then why would that matter?
- Marco Raaphorst
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: 22 Jan 2015
- Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
- Contact:
antic604 wrote: ↑20 Jan 2019I think I explained that somewhere above, but the point was to also see if all DAWs process the VSTs in the same way. Comparing sine waves would be like comparing samples and I belive those tests were done to death already.djfm1983 wrote: ↑20 Jan 2019Why feel the need to use the same VSTi for each DAW? Why not just use a sine wave sample? Sine waves are pure tones so after uploading the same sine wave sample through each DAW with no processing and exporting you could use a spectral graph to see if any thing was added to the pure tone? If you see anything other than the fundamental frequency of the sine wave you’ll know that the DAW colored the sound.
Also, I wanted to avoid doing the "proper" null-test, because I think that even if there were so tiny differences, they could be inaudible to uman hearing, so even if it's not perfect then why would that matter?
Maybe VST developers should jump in, but VST runs in all program exactly the same. It's an external container. The only thing you need to make sure when running a test such as this one is that you're not measuring any free running, random stuff. You could try to use a sampler with just a "perfect" sine wave. No effects, nothing.
@antic604 Could you reupload these files one more time or send them to me?
As of about "tiny differences" - there should not be even tiny ones in the audio-world, as already the tiny artifacts in the sound already matter ALOT.
As of about "tiny differences" - there should not be even tiny ones in the audio-world, as already the tiny artifacts in the sound already matter ALOT.
Everything should be there on my Google drive link I posted in the OP.
I only removed the Soundcloud stuff.
Ok, I get it. I wasted few hours of mine and (all of) yours time. Won't happen againMarco Raaphorst wrote: ↑21 Jan 2019Maybe VST developers should jump in, but VST runs in all program exactly the same. It's an external container. The only thing you need to make sure when running a test such as this one is that you're not measuring any free running, random stuff. You could try to use a sampler with just a "perfect" sine wave. No effects, nothing.
- Marco Raaphorst
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: 22 Jan 2015
- Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
- Contact:
no problem. this is how we do it, by trial and errorantic604 wrote: ↑21 Jan 2019Ok, I get it. I wasted few hours of mine and (all of) yours time. Won't happen againMarco Raaphorst wrote: ↑21 Jan 2019Maybe VST developers should jump in, but VST runs in all program exactly the same. It's an external container. The only thing you need to make sure when running a test such as this one is that you're not measuring any free running, random stuff. You could try to use a sampler with just a "perfect" sine wave. No effects, nothing.
- Creativemind
- Posts: 4899
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK
Replace Santa Claus with Bigfoot or a Yeti or the Lochness Monster lol!
Yes, there was a mammoth thread on here (about 20 odd pages I think) 3 years ago with many doing tests, Selig and possibly 8cross are 2 I can remember who commented I think and the overwhelming consensus was, with no effects added or anything that could alter the audio, Reason sounded exactly the same as any other daw.
A guy on that thread even posted an audio comparison clip of a Thor patch rendered to audio (if memory serves me correct) and asked which one was Reason, which wasn't. They sounded almost identical but one sounded just a fraction better and a couple of people agreed. Surprisingly the one that sounded fractionally better was Reason.
Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3
hmmm crumbs a real grain of sand diffrence, with max marketing and a thouragh advertising campaign the reason sound is a there and b in. thatll be 500 quid payable to demt, at the marketing department. demt.co.uk
Reason 12 ,gear4 music sdp3 stage piano .nektar gxp 88,behringer umc1800 .line6 spider4 30
hear scince reason 2.5
hear scince reason 2.5
- Creativemind
- Posts: 4899
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK
Interesting video. I wonder what frequency I can hear up to at 43yo?
I used this video from You Tube and I couldn't hear 13, 000Hz or above.
Is that gonna be accurate with it being You Tube?
Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3
Not a 240p video. Low bandwidth streams are low-passed around 12 kHz.
Depends on what you call "tiny". For some, a difference of 3 dB is barely noticeable. Others can hear a difference of 1 dB easily in all situations.
But for a null test, it is considered "tiny" when it's below the threshold of hearing or masked by other sounds. Additionally, most of these "differences" are either a difference of level or timing, which have NO effect on the quality of the sound but can reveal themselves in a null test.
And most null tests I've conducted on single files or summing are well over 100 dB or non-existent. That is tiny enough to become a non issue for all but the dedicated card-carrying pixel peepers out there (borrowing a photography term here).
Selig Audio, LLC
- Marco Raaphorst
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: 22 Jan 2015
- Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
- Contact:
This brings up a new idea in my head: I guess a lot of people are worried their software might not be ok. Or they need to make sure their software is better than some of the stuff other people are using.
You might ask yourself why that is.
You might ask yourself why that is.
Shortcomings usually. But it just depends on the person I guess.Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑21 Jan 2019This brings up a new idea in my head: I guess a lot of people are worried their software might not be ok. Or they need to make sure their software is better than some of the stuff other people are using.
You might ask yourself why that is.
Sometimes people just want to figure out the "highest quality" possible for making music, which doesn't sound too crazy to me. Trying to hear a difference in DAW's that isn't there, is bit crazy though
I just listened again and this time they all sounded the same. No soundengine there, just a mind-engine.
That's a fair point, I guess.Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑21 Jan 2019This brings up a new idea in my head: I guess a lot of people are worried their software might not be ok. Or they need to make sure their software is better than some of the stuff other people are using.
You might ask yourself why that is.
Some of the best music out there is poorly recorded and/or purposefully processed in a "wrong" way (just listen to Portishead, for example). And some of the most pristine, clean and perfectly-sounding music is devoid of any soul, meaning and artistic merit (just turn on the radio). Especially with electronic music who's to say what it the correct way to sound? How does the perfect saw-tooth oscillator sound: is it one calculated with a formula? or the one from MiniMoog? If we'd get different renders of the same sample from Reaper, Cubase and Reason how do you determine which one is "worse" and how would you even define "worse" in this contexts, because different doesn't necessarily mean worse? The whole discussion about DAW audio engines is a bit like if someone discussed artistic worth of Mona Lisa (or whatever famous picture) saying it's only Ok, because the painter could've used better brush or better canvas
I'd gladly delete the topic, but I can't.
Can a mod close it, please?
- Marco Raaphorst
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: 22 Jan 2015
- Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
- Contact:
It's a trap I fall into many times. Still do. I am testing my stuff over and over again, and against competition just to make sure I am using the right tools. But all that time I can better put in making things. I know all this, but the trap is always there.
I believe it is a subjective. Mistakes can be beautiful. Bad sound can be great sound. There are no rules really, but that trap is a trap. At least it is for me. Maybe I should take a tattoo "just make music bro!"
I believe it is a subjective. Mistakes can be beautiful. Bad sound can be great sound. There are no rules really, but that trap is a trap. At least it is for me. Maybe I should take a tattoo "just make music bro!"
Exactly! That's why I appreciate Reason's graphical approach to things for example the fact, that you can't type in values for most of the knobs, faders, etc. I was really struggling with this first couple of weeks when I started using Reason (coming from Live/Bitwig), because I was used to typing "-6dB" or "60kHz" or "135ms" or "25%" and I thought this was BETTER, because it was PRECISE. With Reason, I had to start using my ears more, because if the only options I had were either -5.96dB or -6.03dB (and I had to be super patient to get there with Shift), then why even bother anymore? I'd just LISTEN for a sweet spot and set it at whatever value SOUNDED right.Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑22 Jan 2019It's a trap I fall into many times. Still do. I am testing my stuff over and over again, and against competition just to make sure I am using the right tools. But all that time I can better put in making things. I know all this, but the trap is always there.
Yesterday there was a post on KvR's Bitwig forum asking "why you love Bitwig" and I actually wrote that I know Bitwig is the better DAW, but I love Reason
Wish someone just combined the two
- Marco Raaphorst
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: 22 Jan 2015
- Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
- Contact:
The grass is always greener at...
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests