Old 11-14-2017, 03:21 PM   #41
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,435
Default

Hmmm... Must have been a scenario like me not being able to afford to even read a Sonic brochure or even keep a memory of their existence at the time. Oh well.
serr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 04:16 PM   #42
BenK-msx
Human being with feelings
 
BenK-msx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 4,508
Default

Trump has the Best Audio Engines.



BenK-msx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 04:43 PM   #43
Softsynth
Human being with feelings
 
Softsynth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,576
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
Then they'll take the audio from the youtube video they downloaded and burn it to a CD. Then their friend rips that CD (unaware of their default settings to convert it to 96k mp3) and records his own vocals over it with his USB mic. (Side tech note: His DAW system clock is set to internal, not to sync off the incoming digital signal from that USB mic as is required. He doesn't notice the constant clicks and pops recorded in the audio from the clock mismatch.)

About now the conversation about how Protools is clearly better than any modern DAW takes place.

Then he goes back to class the next day where his teacher tells him the size of the downloaded installer file determines the mix engine resolution.
That's about the size of it.

Take a pair of rulers. Ruler A must be straighter than ruler B because A is twice the price of B in the shops.

Softsynth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 05:11 PM   #44
pipelineaudio
Mortal
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 12,525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholas View Post
It rather worries me that somebody in a teaching position could be advancing ideas which have no scientific basis.
You would be absolutely HORRIFIED on a college campus then!

We have a nursing department here teaching reiki
__________________
REAPER Shirts are Back! - https://shop.spreadshirt.com/pipelineaudio/
pipelineaudio is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 05:15 PM   #45
pipelineaudio
Mortal
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 12,525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
Pro Tools had "double precision" 48 bit fixed integer summing. Avid were actually late to the game with floating point. Dithering did make a non-trivial difference in the days of fixed integer audio though.

Where it got weird was people arguing about which sounded better between 48 bit fixed-integer and 32 bit floating point processing. But in the days before native Pro Tools you have to take into account the hardware differences as well as the audio engine.
And 24 bit insert points, which is where if people wanted to be EXTREME pedants, they could put in some absolutely pathological audio files and do some shennanigans to prove that against even the free DAW's PT "the industry standard" was the only broken one.

In real life its pretty hard to make that 24 bit thing matter in any real world signal levels and practices
__________________
REAPER Shirts are Back! - https://shop.spreadshirt.com/pipelineaudio/
pipelineaudio is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 02:43 PM   #46
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,394
Default

Hmm, someone appears here to make 2 posts about "Reaper's audio engine", causes some discussion and then disappears. There maybe was some way to call those kinds of people in the internet, but it escapes me...
__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 07:30 PM   #47
BenK-msx
Human being with feelings
 
BenK-msx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 4,508
Default

Russian Audio Engine TrollBots
BenK-msx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2018, 09:12 PM   #48
robdarling
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1
Default

I see these posts from time to time. The religious bits get boring. There are some basics to always consider...

All DAWs do a lot of math.

There are a lot of ways to approach the math.

They all have an effect on sound quality.

Depending on design goals, different math approaches are chosen, and so things sound different.

Every time you go in and out of a signal path element... input gain, insert path, panner, volume, summer, input gain, insert path, volume would be a pretty basic chain for any channel in a basic mix... you are going to do math and when you do math, you have remainders to deal with. You also may end up with something that is outside your dynamic range. You also likely need dither.

How you approach this stuff is not magic... most of it is really well-tread territory.

But in all things there are tradeoffs of audio performance vs. features vs. impact on latency performance vs. total system load performance, and that leads you to choices, sometimes hard ones.

Cubase, for example, has to do some serious hoop-jumping in order to have input mixer inserts, and main mixer paths/inserts, and output mixer inserts, and control room mixer paths/inserts, and headphone mixer paths/inserts, with latency compensation that considers all of them.

The result is that, even with the move to the 64 bit mixer and some big improvements, it still sounds hazy/soft compared to Reaper or Harrison Mixbus, which are relatively simple environments when compared to Cubase (play with removing the fader from the signal path in Mixbus... that gives you a taste for how this works.)

So, yes these things can sound different, and for very real reasons that are not made up marketing stuff.

Generally speaking, the more complex the mixer, the more likely it is that compromises are made to get in and out of all the buffers while keeping latency in a useful place while not spiking the CPU.

Can you hear it?

Depending on what other things you choose to do along the way (like in your gain structure choices, from mic through plugs to final mixbus), you may or may not find this gets resolved for you.

Depending on the resolution of your system and how much your sources are prone to being effected by this stuff, you may or may not find this gets resolved for you.

Depending on how often you hear analog sources alongside ad/da chains, you may or may not have a good reference for what things sound like before they hit the digital math, and what the math is doing, and what is the highest quality.

But there are solidly different ways to approach manipulating digital audio mathematically, and some are better than others at preserving maximum quality, and different DAW's definitely take different approaches and sound different.
robdarling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2018, 10:36 PM   #49
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 17,720
Default

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .......................
__________________
We are in a rudderless ship with a fool at the wheel who doesnt even realise it ain`t working any more
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2018, 10:48 PM   #50
EricTbone
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElyR View Post
Audio Engine is not as strong
*lol* He's full of it. Ask him what he means by "strong". Ask him to be specific. He won't be able to.

Reaper is an engineer's DAW if there ever was one. Not only is it the most efficient DAW (according to testing), it has the most flexible, powerful routing of any DAW. Every track is a 64 channel DAW. For that matter, every item on every track is it's own 64 channel DAW.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robdarling View Post
Cubase, for example, has to do some serious hoop-jumping in order to have input mixer inserts, and main mixer paths/inserts, and output mixer inserts, and control room mixer paths/inserts, and headphone mixer paths/inserts, with latency compensation that considers all of them.

The result is that, even with the move to the 64 bit mixer and some big improvements, it still sounds hazy/soft compared to Reaper
I used Cubase for 10 years and recently began transferring all my projects over Reaper and rebuilding their FX chains/automation/etc. so I can sell Cubase. That involves hours at the computer A/Bing Cubase against Reaper. Cubase doesn't sound in the least bit "hazy".
EricTbone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2018, 11:04 PM   #51
woogish
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 386
Default

robdarling-

could you let us know what your background is so that we might better judge the merit of your commentary

thanx
woogish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2018, 11:21 PM   #52
morgon
Human being with feelings
 
morgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 'straya
Posts: 7,813
Default

The audio engine "debate" is obviously a red herring.

There is issues in my experience about time sig/tempo variations afa MIDI/Audio sync that might be resolvable by sheer diligence but I prefer to leave things as they are when playing in free time, by default using a timing track as sync; e.g any track deemed to have the right timing can have other tracks synced to it inc. MIDI trks via the floating MIDI Editor screen which can be superimposed over any other track*


*A big deal imo
morgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2018, 01:31 PM   #53
woogish
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 386
Default

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .......................>We are in a rudderless ship with a fool at the wheel who doesnt even realise it ain`t working any more> ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .......................

Are you implying that Reaper is a rudderless ship with a fool at the wheel who doesnt even realise it ain`t working any more, or is this just a form of Chinese water torture?
If the latter, then ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................... REALLY does apply.
woogish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2018, 02:43 PM   #54
shmuelyosef
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 14
Default

The discussion is a bit silly...the big variation from DAW Install #1 to DAW Install #2 will revolve around the plugins used as far as sound quality is concerned. The actual audio engine is transactional and pretty unlikely to cause problems, particularly if you're comparing between two 24-bit or 32-bit audio output streams. At 16 -bit rendering with lots of tracks there is more room for nuance.

I recently switched from Cakewalk SONAR to Reaper (actually still making the transition) so I am still using all the same plugins. Running project tracks that are imported with the same plugins uses less % of total CPU time and seems to balance among four CPUs more evenly with Reaper. This is an apples to apples type of comparison.

The only Reaper crashes that I have experienced are with the Soundtower manager for my synth, and it doesn't really crash Reaper, but does hang the USB-MIDI port so I have to restart Reaper.

Religious discussions in music are rampant...I play woodwinds and the hype about instruments is comic:

Platinum flutes vs brass with silverplate (and everything in-between)
Wooden clarinets (which have distorted bores and develop cracks) vs composite materials (which maintain intonation vs. temperature!!)
The color of saxophones (this is one of the funnier ones...with silver saxes sounding "brighter" than brass and black paint sounding "dark")

The literature is full of blind tests that are well-executed and show that even the most refined ears and professional players cannot tell the difference when bore shape, mouthpiece, reeds, keywork, and most importantly...setup are controlled for...however, musicians have to justify the fact that they paid 4X the cost of an equally competent instrument. the one difference is that $20,000 instruments get much more attention to detail than $4000 instruments which can (for $500-$1000 labor...I'm a repair tech) be made to perform just as well.

Just like algorithm differences in DAW recording (i.e. plugins) can create distinctive differences, changes in mouthpiece and bore design in instruments are significant, however the raw materials (like the numerical final output processing in DAWs) are generally well below the perception level.
__________________
SONAR refugee

Last edited by shmuelyosef; 05-31-2018 at 02:52 PM.
shmuelyosef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2018, 03:10 PM   #55
brainwreck
Human being with feelings
 
brainwreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The 90's
Posts: 19,624
Default

These discussions pop up over and over and go on and on. If anyone really thinks that there is a difference in 'audio engines', post some sound examples of such. I never heard a single one in any of these sorts of threads, and I think there is good reason for it.
__________________
The media are misleading the public about...pretty much everything.
brainwreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2018, 11:05 PM   #56
mschnell
Human being with feelings
 
mschnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,960
Default

Anybody who payed big $$ for a DAW will hear that it's sound is better than others and hence conclude the audio engine is more perfect in some magical way.

Appropriate psychological experiments (in other areas of real live) show this beyond any doubt.

You even can buy extremely high priced power cords to make you guitar amp sound by far more transparent .

-Michael
__________________
www.boa-sorte.de

Last edited by mschnell; 05-31-2018 at 11:16 PM.
mschnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2018, 11:41 PM   #57
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 17,720
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woogish View Post
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .......................>We are in a rudderless ship with a fool at the wheel who doesnt even realise it ain`t working any more> ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .......................

Are you implying that Reaper is a rudderless ship with a fool at the wheel who doesnt even realise it ain`t working any more, or is this just a form of Chinese water torture?
If the latter, then ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................... REALLY does apply.
(grin) Stop being Woogish! Actually that IS a bit sloppy... its intended to be a continuation from the last sig I had & which referred more directly to the cretins running my particular collection of countries at present. St Theresa MayorMaynot
__________________
We are in a rudderless ship with a fool at the wheel who doesnt even realise it ain`t working any more
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2018, 11:41 PM   #58
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 17,720
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woogish View Post
robdarling-

could you let us know what your background is so that we might better judge the merit of your commentary

thanx
+1 extra letters added to appease the ForumGod
__________________
We are in a rudderless ship with a fool at the wheel who doesnt even realise it ain`t working any more
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2018, 01:41 AM   #59
siehorst
Human being with feelings
 
siehorst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 334
Default

I'm a bit late but can't resist:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElyR View Post
... Reaper runs so lightly on the CPU comparing to Cubase and other DAWs because its Audio Engine is not as strong
CPU load as parameter for quality? Yes, as Qualitiy for the programmers skills,
To claim CPU load in the way it is mentioned here is nonsense at it's best.
siehorst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 09:49 PM   #60
woogish
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 386
Default

look, idiots -
Reaper sounds better for two reasons:
1. Reaper is pretty
2. I say so
woogish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 11:02 PM   #61
enroe
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woogish View Post
look, idiots -
Reaper sounds better for two reasons:
1. Reaper is pretty
2. I say so
Haha, why revive such an old thread?

All which can be said has already been said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by brainwreck
These discussions pop up over and over and go on and on. If anyone really thinks that there is a difference in 'audio engines', post some sound examples of such. I never heard a single one in any of these sorts of threads, and I think there is good reason for it.
In the digital realm "1 + 1 = 2" always and
forever. And that is the reasion why every DAW
sounds the same.
__________________
free mp3s + info: andy-enroe.de songs and weird stuff: enroe.de
enroe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2018, 01:21 AM   #62
mschnell
Human being with feelings
 
mschnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,960
Default

The more expensive ones do sound better in the ears of those who spent the money, even if all bits in the output are identical .

(Also an "always and forever" law of nature.)

-Michael
__________________
www.boa-sorte.de

Last edited by mschnell; 09-15-2018 at 05:25 AM.
mschnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2018, 03:16 AM   #63
RCJacH
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell View Post
The more expensive ones do sound better in the ears of those who spent the money, even if all bits in the output are identical .

(Also an "always and forever law of nature.)

-Michael
Not only that, I would say when you switch to a more analog looking theme like White Tie's Imperial, it will also affect the sound engine and make it sound more analog. Same with plugins .
RCJacH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2018, 09:10 AM   #64
JSMastering
Human being with feelings
 
JSMastering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RCJacH View Post
Not only that, I would say when you switch to a more analog looking theme like White Tie's Imperial, it will also affect the sound engine and make it sound more analog. Same with plugins .
It's funny, but there's some actual scientific evidence that supports that conclusion.

Sighted humans with relatively normal hearing prioritize visual information. Always.

The simplest scientific examples of this are people asked to press one button when they see a stimulus (e.g., a light turning on) and another button when they hear a stimulus (e.g., a beep). If you give both cues at the same time, the vast majority of the time, people will skip the beep button.

The experiments go deeper than that, but those are the bare bones of it.

When it comes to something as subjective and emotionally charged as sound quality (and sonic preferences), these visual prominence effects have some pretty extreme and unexpected outcomes.

Things sound like they look like they should sound.

If a plugin gui is dusty and rusted, it'll sound more vintage-y than a pristine, modern one. Well lit rooms sound brighter than dimmer ones. The color of a speaker cabinet can affect your impressions of it.

It's kinda crazy how much this affects subtle judgments.
JSMastering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2018, 12:26 PM   #65
mschnell
Human being with feelings
 
mschnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,960
Default

Do LPs and CDs sound rounder than USBsticks holding audio files ?

-Michael
__________________
www.boa-sorte.de
mschnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2018, 12:31 PM   #66
RCJacH
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSMastering View Post
It's funny, but there's some actual scientific evidence that supports that conclusion.

Sighted humans with relatively normal hearing prioritize visual information. Always.

The simplest scientific examples of this are people asked to press one button when they see a stimulus (e.g., a light turning on) and another button when they hear a stimulus (e.g., a beep). If you give both cues at the same time, the vast majority of the time, people will skip the beep button.

The experiments go deeper than that, but those are the bare bones of it.

When it comes to something as subjective and emotionally charged as sound quality (and sonic preferences), these visual prominence effects have some pretty extreme and unexpected outcomes.

Things sound like they look like they should sound.

If a plugin gui is dusty and rusted, it'll sound more vintage-y than a pristine, modern one. Well lit rooms sound brighter than dimmer ones. The color of a speaker cabinet can affect your impressions of it.

It's kinda crazy how much this affects subtle judgments.
Well I completely agree with this phenomenon, however the issue is that since the source signal has not changed, the people who does not have the vintage visual stimulus will not be affected, and thus might be hearing things with subtle difference.
RCJacH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2018, 05:02 PM   #67
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,394
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell View Post
Do LPs and CDs sound rounder than USBsticks holding audio files ?

-Michael
No, if your USB stick is delivered like this :

__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2018, 07:50 PM   #68
peter5992
Human being with feelings
 
peter5992's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 8,463
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerome_oneil View Post
The long answer is all up there.

The short answer is your teacher doesn't know what he's talking about.
That sums it up.
peter5992 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 07:21 AM   #69
JSMastering
Human being with feelings
 
JSMastering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell View Post
Do LPs and CDs sound rounder than USBsticks holding audio files ?

-Michael
Given the vagueness of audiophile terminology, I'd say yes. I've also witnessed people refer to CDs as sounding more analog than files just because there was a hardware player rather than a computer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RCJacH View Post
Well I completely agree with this phenomenon, however the issue is that since the source signal has not changed, the people who does not have the vintage visual stimulus will not be affected, and thus might be hearing things with subtle difference.
Or something else is responsible. But, that's not what we were discussing. We were talking about audio engines and plugins, and those visual differences are probably responsible for some of the differences people find.
JSMastering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 09:02 AM   #70
chip mcdonald
Human being with feelings
 
chip mcdonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NA - North Augusta South Carolina
Posts: 3,500
Default

I hate the 21st century.
__________________
]]]>- guitar lessons - www.chipmcdonald.com-<[[[
Experiencing Guitar: Essays from Teaching by Chip McDonald https://www.amazon.com/dp/1521877823..._QZJxAbA4GVDC1
chip mcdonald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 09:11 AM   #71
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chip mcdonald View Post
I hate the 21st century.
I think it's the folks that are trying to bring back the 17th century that are the problem.
serr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 01:47 PM   #72
mschnell
Human being with feelings
 
mschnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,960
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chip mcdonald View Post
I hate the 21st century.
Happily there will be no 22nd.

-Michael
__________________
www.boa-sorte.de
mschnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2018, 01:05 PM   #73
YvesK
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Belgium
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brainwreck View Post
These discussions pop up over and over and go on and on. If anyone really thinks that there is a difference in 'audio engines', post some sound examples of such. I never heard a single one in any of these sorts of threads, and I think there is good reason for it.
It's easy to "prove" that audio engines do differ, by performing poorly executed tests. Here's (what looks like?) proof, though, that there's *NO* difference between 'audio engines', or at least between their end results: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0SKwEI_7Wc . Now, I'm no techie, far from it in fact, so I can't vouch for this experiment to be conclusive. Besides, as announced at the start of the video, this test served specifically to only compare the summing of both DAW's, whatever that distinction may entail. But it does look like a simple procedure, which is well executed too.
Although, Dynamo was able to prove on several occasions, that it is possible to insert a smart phone into a Coca-Cola bottle...
YvesK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2018, 01:11 PM   #74
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,394
Default

Great job by the original poster, this now comes up at the top of Google search for "Reaper audio engine" :

__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2018, 02:11 PM   #75
JSMastering
Human being with feelings
 
JSMastering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YvesK View Post
It's easy to "prove" that audio engines do differ, by performing poorly executed tests.
It's easier to prove you can hear differences than to prove things are the same (unless you're comparing files, because diff exists). It's also easy to prove a few very subtle things make for consistently perceivable differences...like level. And you have to eliminate all of the known sources of perceivable differences to actually conclude something else is responsible for them.

Because that's hard, people will continue to argue about audio engines and summing and a bunch of other things that don't matter.

To a degree, it's probably best to ignore it and get back to work. The problem comes when "new" people try to get information. Because so much of it is bad.

Fortunately, it's usually not a problem unless someone holds off being creative because they're convinced their gear isn't good enough.
JSMastering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2018, 04:45 PM   #76
Steviebone
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 318
Default

I used Cuebase/Nuendo for the better part of 20 years before moving to Reaper. I've also regularly used Wavelab, Adobe and other DAWs. From my ears there is no discernible difference in playback on any of them. As for processing I have always felt that anything on a 64-bit platform (as opposed to 32 bit) seems to sound and perform better to my ears but that may be strictly subjective.

Reaper is a great deal more efficient on CPU usage. I think this is largely due to to the lack of intrusive copy protection schemes. I have read somewhere before that the code in Steinberg products is as much as 50% copy protection. This makes sense to me as Steinberg is one of the few companies out there who have successfully avoided rampant cracking of their products. I always found their products to be somewhat unstable and a hog on computer resources comparatively speaking.

I'm no expert and I'm not making any accusations but I would lean towards accepting that perspective as at least somewhat true. So to answer your question yes reaper is lighter on CPU resources because it is written in a more efficient manner but I don't think it has anything to do with sound quality at all. In fact I might make the argument of the opposite since any code that is being used to circumvent illegal pirating is taking away from resources that would otherwise be being used to process audio.
Steviebone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2018, 12:43 AM   #77
Gerrit
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Maastricht
Posts: 41
Default

See : ProTools vs Reaper vs Neve Analog | Stream Records

Can we put this to rest now?

As for the comparison with the Neve console, the null test is missing and my question would be what happens if you use 'Neve' plugins or other stuff on the DAWs. But that's another can of worms

P.S. Never underestimate the McGurk effect
Gerrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2018, 06:29 AM   #78
JSMastering
Human being with feelings
 
JSMastering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerrit View Post
See : ProTools vs Reaper vs Neve Analog | Stream Records

Can we put this to rest now?

As for the comparison with the Neve console, the null test is missing and my question would be what happens if you use 'Neve' plugins or other stuff on the DAWs. But that's another can of worms
They did provide the WAVs in the video description.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerrit View Post
P.S. Never underestimate the McGurk effect
That's exactly what I was talking about. It's an excellent example.

BTW, the difference between those two syllables is mostly the speed of the transient.
JSMastering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2018, 01:06 PM   #79
YvesK
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Belgium
Posts: 26
Default

Amongst other things, psychological factors have been mentioned as a reason why people, nay: musicians, claim to hear differences between DAW's. Just as an illustration how tenacious this influence can be, do scroll down 20 or so comments down from the Pro-Tools v/s Reaper v/s Neve video (post # 73). There's actually a person who, after watching the mathemetical proof of perfect nullification, states that Pro-Tools actually sounds warmer than anything but yet Reaper comes close. Say What?!?!?!
YvesK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2018, 01:09 PM   #80
YvesK
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Belgium
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSMastering View Post
It's easier to prove you can hear differences than to prove things are the same (unless you're comparing files, because diff exists). It's also easy to prove a few very subtle things make for consistently perceivable differences...like level. And you have to eliminate all of the known sources of perceivable differences to actually conclude something else is responsible for them.

Because that's hard, people will continue to argue about audio engines and summing and a bunch of other things that don't matter.

To a degree, it's probably best to ignore it and get back to work. The problem comes when "new" people try to get information. Because so much of it is bad.

Fortunately, it's usually not a problem unless someone holds off being creative because they're convinced their gear isn't good enough.
Totally exactly what I meant, but which you explain so much clearer.
YvesK is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.