| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#81
|
|||
|
|||
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Can you capture the output via s/pdif and compare the files?
I can try it & see. I'd have to borrow or otherwise get ahold of some other device with a spdif in, as I don't have anything besides this particular PC/DAW setup at the moment that has one. You'll have to get the levels really close... if a single track at nominal in both packges shows a difference, yer onto something. Getting two mixes thae close might not be all that possible, although... Well, I'm talking about the same mix played back through different apps. Nothing fancy, standard stereo mixdown file @ 16/44.1, mixed to disk in CubaseSX. NeilH |
|
#82
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Les Cargill wrote:
Software can affect sound negatively if and only if some sort of math error is coded into things. These errors are well-known and easily avoidable. Won't matter. The register interface on a soundcard expects a stream of X sample rate, Ybit depth, on time and under budget. Anything different simply won't work. That is all* a driver does - shuttle buffers. Well, I have personally experienced a *huge* difference in sound when choosing between ASIO, MME, WDM drivers in Samplitude using an RME 9652 card. I used the extact same clock and D/A converters with the only difference being the driver model chosen. The ASIO driver was the best sounding by far, not even close. Mark http://SoundtechRecording.com "Putting the lion's share of your attention and investment out in front of the microphones pays off every time." -- Bob Olhsson |
|
#83
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Won't matter. The register interface on a soundcard expects a stream of
X sample rate, Ybit depth, on time and under budget. Anything different simply won't work. That is all* a driver does - shuttle buffers. Well, I have personally experienced a *huge* difference in sound when choosing between ASIO, MME, WDM drivers in Samplitude using an RME 9652 card. I used the extact same clock and D/A converters with the only difference being the driver model chosen. The ASIO driver was the best sounding by far, not even close. No, Mark, we're all just hallucinating... you get rid of your Samplitude, and I'll sell my CubaseSX, and we'll all go out & buy Cakewalk & pocket the difference. I mean, if all DAW's sound the same, why not buy the cheapest one & save some dough? On a serious note, the driver thing you mention is interesting - I wonder if Will might have been onto something when he mentioned that possibility earlier in this thread. I'm going to see if I can load a different driver for my SX (IIRC, I originally had it working with some Microsoft driver, before I selected the ASIO driver for the Audiolink interface), and see if I can hear any kind of difference. Won't be a perfect a/b test, as I'll have to stop/reload/playback, but could be interesting, nonetheless. NeilH |
|
#84
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Excuse me for joining this late, but what's going on? You seam to
claim that either PT or Nuendo, or both (only different to each other), change data on the "way" from converter to disk, right? Can you confirm the following: 1 - Same source. 2 - Same capturing device/ method. 3 - Same A/D converter. 4 - Both recording applications set in neutral mode. 5 - Both applications recording at once (this automaticaly takes care of 1,2 and 3). If not possible, analog circuit imperfections will have influence. If all of above is fullfiled, you should end with 2 identical files, which can be proved by DATA comparator of a kind. Hope you don't argue 2 identical DATA files can not differ in sound (if 6 and 7, see below). If files are not identical and you still care to listen, than you have to follow the following: 6 - No further processing done 7 - Both files played through same playbeck engine, set EXACTLY the same at all times (Kruger's ABX comparator does the trick). Can you hear the difference? Vladan www.geocities.com/vla_dan_l www.mp3.com/lesly , www.mp3.com/shook , www.mp3.com/lesly2 www.kunsttick.com/artists/vuskovic/indexdat.htm |
|
#85
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Also, I forgot, and saw it already mentioned here, driver can take the
part. For instance, my WDM drivers play at preset atenuation of -5.5. There may be something in recording too, but I have no proof. Therefore same drivers should be used in both applications. Vladan www.geocities.com/vla_dan_l www.mp3.com/lesly , www.mp3.com/shook , www.mp3.com/lesly2 www.kunsttick.com/artists/vuskovic/indexdat.htm |
|
#86
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
|
|
#87
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
It was just an
observation by me about the differences in sound between Nuendo & PTLE using a common front end ........that I feel is ABSOLUTELY true.......to my ears. I think we all get that by now. So again, pick the one you like and have at it. -R |
|
#88
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Rick wrote:
It was just an observation by me about the differences in sound between Nuendo & PTLE using a common front end ........that I feel is ABSOLUTELY true.......to my ears. I think we all get that by now. So again, pick the one you like and have at it. -R I agree I am giving it a rest. I respond here & there it's just folks keep bringing up the summing CD for some reason. My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm |
|
#90
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Rick wrote:
Problem: Why do two workstations sharing the same front end (literally) record different sounding files? (the summing bus, EQ or other processing in the program has NOTHING to do with this so don't even bring it up) Quite simply, we're not buying your premise. Just the fact that somebody thought he heard a difference, and I don't doubt his sincerity, doesn't mean that it has anything to do with what you're describing. Could be a number of things that would account for his perception. No details have been provided except "I know what I heard". So, since I wasn't there, all I can say is great, go with the one that sounds best, for whatever reason. Definitley, I know I can't prove it with data........but let's get back to the real world. If I have my choice of 2 different files to use while mixing........as you say I go with the one I think sounds best & that's the bottomline. I am curious about one thing. How was this setup so that 2 different workstations recorded the same signal from the same converter? Did you split the digital stream after conversion? If so, how? And then did you import the files to a 3rd workstation to compare them, so that playback couldn't be the culprit? And if so, how do you know an error didn't occur later in this process. Since this is an issue for you, you should research it further. if there's a well known DAW out there that can't accurately record the bitstream from a converter, I'm sure the entire industry would love to know about it. It should be very easy to demonstrate. I won't be doing this test because I don't, for a moment, believe this is an issue. But if you do, you should investigate further. If you think Hank has his head up his ass, go ahead and prove it or admit you can't hear through your own butt cheeks. -R My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm |
|
#91
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
So I'm telling you, since you need to know for your business, that
Protools is not "doing something" to the files as they are recorded. What would it do? The moment you change levels and sum a couple of track together on one output it actually does quite a lot. Mix 40 channels together on 2-bus with ProTools and then try the same with Nuendo. (using the same converters) Your jaw is going to hit the floor when you hear the difference. Most people make the mistake and think having the most expensive DAW will get them the best sounding one. I can tell you: Don't get mislead! Check it out for yourself. Steve ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
|
#92
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
RK wrote:
I am curious about one thing. How was this setup so that 2 different workstations recorded the same signal from the same converter? Easy, 001 does it..........switch back & forth between the 2 softwares, of course closing the other one not in use first. Did you split the digital stream after conversion? If so, how? And then did you import the files to a 3rd workstation to compare them, so that playback couldn't be the culprit? And if so, how do you know an error didn't occur later in this process. I did play through a 3rd workstation but actually I just grabbed each file form the respective softwares "Audio Folder" and burned to disc & listened. Since this is an issue for you, you should research it further. if there's a well known DAW out there that can't accurately record the bitstream from a converter, I'm sure the entire industry would love to know about it. It should be very easy to demonstrate. I won't be doing this test because I don't, for a moment, believe this is an issue. But if you do, you should investigate further. If you think Hank has his head up his ass, go ahead and prove it or admit you can't hear through your own butt cheeks. -R My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm |
|
#93
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Who is this "we" that isn't buying the premise? And why don't you
respond to my question? Problem: Why do two workstations sharing the same front end (literally) record different sounding files? (the summing bus, EQ or other processing in the program has NOTHING to do with this so don't even bring it up) ? You obviously don't think this is worthwhile so why are you even bothering to respond to it? If you have nothing constructive to offer then stay out of it. Why would you want to stop this information from being discussed? I really don't understand your opposition to the topic. R Krizman wrote: Problem: Why do two workstations sharing the same front end (literally) record different sounding files? (the summing bus, EQ or other processing in the program has NOTHING to do with this so don't even bring it up) Quite simply, we're not buying your premise. Just the fact that somebody thought he heard a difference, and I don't doubt his sincerity, doesn't mean that it has anything to do with what you're describing. Could be a number of things that would account for his perception. No details have been provided except "I know what I heard". So, since I wasn't there, all I can say is great, go with the one that sounds best, for whatever reason. I am curious about one thing. How was this setup so that 2 different workstations recorded the same signal from the same converter? Did you split the digital stream after conversion? If so, how? And then did you import the files to a 3rd workstation to compare them, so that playback couldn't be the culprit? And if so, how do you know an error didn't occur later in this process. Since this is an issue for you, you should research it further. if there's a well known DAW out there that can't accurately record the bitstream from a converter, I'm sure the entire industry would love to know about it. It should be very easy to demonstrate. I won't be doing this test because I don't, for a moment, believe this is an issue. But if you do, you should investigate further. If you think Hank has his head up his ass, go ahead and prove it or admit you can't hear through your own butt cheeks. -R |
|
#94
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Mark Plancke wrote:
Les Cargill wrote: Software can affect sound negatively if and only if some sort of math error is coded into things. These errors are well-known and easily avoidable. Won't matter. The register interface on a soundcard expects a stream of X sample rate, Ybit depth, on time and under budget. Anything different simply won't work. That is all* a driver does - shuttle buffers. Well, I have personally experienced a *huge* difference in sound when choosing between ASIO, MME, WDM drivers in Samplitude using an RME 9652 card. I used the extact same clock and D/A converters with the only difference being the driver model chosen. The ASIO driver was the best sounding by far, not even close. Maybe I'm missing something, but the driver *should* be totally transparent to the sound. I get exactly the same signals with MME or ASIO - this with a Lightpipe to a remote D/A-A/D, but still... Mark http://SoundtechRecording.com "Putting the lion's share of your attention and investment out in front of the microphones pays off every time." -- Bob Olhsson -- Les Cargill |
|
#95
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Yes, but you can write that "4" in various styles of handwriting & fonts -
ever think of that? Doesn't make the math wrong if you do so, just looks different to your eye. Right, which is why it will sound different out of different speakers, converters, etc. Bits are one thing, samples are another... did they yield sample-identical results, too? The samples are represented by a string of ones and zeros--actually, in most cases, a "word" that consists of 24 ones or zeroes in a certain order which the computer outputs in a sequence. These are then stored on a hard drive. It's the most basic thing a computer can do. Those numbers are then spit back in the same order to a converter that extrapolates them into electrical waveforms. If two files have the exact same stream of numbers, in the same order, they are "bit-identical" and will sound the same. Clearly there's a difference in sound between various DAW's Of course there are, but not for the reasons stated here. when I can play back the same stereo mixdown file on the same PC through Soundforge, or Windows Media Player, or imported back into CubaseSX, through the same convertors, & monitors, and to me they each sound a little bit different? I can't speak for these programs. Windows Media Player? They could be running at different bitrates or sample rates. Maybe when you recorded the data your DAWs were set at different sample rates or bit depths. Any number of things might be going on in the playback engine. Why are you insisting that each platform inexplicably alters the data when it inputs it? They're all just playing back the same 1's & 0's, right? Who knows? Anything might be ****ed up at this point. You should do some trouble shooting. You can continue to maintain that the different platforms are altering your data on input, but then you'll never find out what's really happening and the likelihood that your recordings will suck will be a bit higher. Brighter minds than yours have been the victim of systematic errors. -R |
|
#96
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
RK wrote:
I am curious about one thing. How was this setup so that 2 different workstations recorded the same signal from the same converter? Easy, 001 does it..........switch back & forth between the 2 softwares, of course closing the other one not in use first. You mean you had Nuendo and Pro Tools both running at the same time on the same computer. Okay, but I gather they didn't record the same thing at the same time. What exactly were you recording? Presumably something from tape, not a live performance. Well, keep in mind that if you are recording on 2 different passes, the slight analog variations will mean that you won't be able to flip phase and null out your tracks. There will be a slight difference between them, because there is a slight difference in every analog playback. My guess is that you didn't have the inputs of the 2 softwares set in an identical fashion. I once did a session in Proo Tools using 24 bit converters and wondered after awhile why everything sounded like ****. Turns out the program had defaulted to 16 bits, so all my data was being truncated. I reiterate. If you have everything set correctly, there should be no difference in those files. I'd investigate further if I were you. -R |
|
#97
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
You obviously don't think this is worthwhile so why are you even
bothering to respond to it? If you have nothing constructive to offer then stay out of it. Why would you want to stop this information from being discussed? I really don't understand your opposition to the topic. I'm one of the few people who has actually had anything constructive to say about this. Hey discuss away. What would you like to add? Problem: Why do two workstations sharing the same front end (literally) record different sounding files? (the summing bus, EQ or other processing in the program has NOTHING to do with this so don't even bring it up) ? Probably because the user didn't read the manual and ****ed up some input settings. (sometimes answers are just answers, and not glamorous new insights) So what's your explanation, hotshot? -R |
|
#98
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
the
actual recorded file before anything else is done, but besides the extra gain, it's the quality of sound is still different. hahah I know hey I/m having fun, too bad it's true. The mind boggles. -R |
|
#99
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Mix 40 channels together on 2-bus with ProTools and then try the same with
Nuendo. (using the same converters) Your jaw is going to hit the floor when you hear the difference. It's been done with 24 tracks, in a very scientific manner in a very public forum, and believe me, nobody's jaw hit the ground. Perhaps 40 is the magic number? This is all valid stuff for discussion, but you guys need to get a little more current. There's lots of interesting stuff going on, but it's way more complex that the simple, and for the most part wrong, generalizations in this thread. Don't take my word for it. Look around. -R |
|
#100
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
I can't speak for these programs. Windows Media Player? They could be
running at different bitrates or sample rates. How can they be running at different bitrates or sample rates if I'm taking the same stereo file & playing it back through each of these apps? Is that possible? Not being sarcastic here, but is it possible for a 16-bit digital file to be played back at 15 bits (assuming I am not somehow purposely altering the playback properties of said app)? I know it's possible to play back a file at adifferent sample rate, but is it conceiveable that oneof these apps would play back at a sample rate that's "off" enough to give me a perception of a different sound, but not "off" enough that I wouldn't detect a shift in pitch? I'm thinking that's pretty unlikely - to use the old medical school analogy, I'm looking for horses here, not zebras. Maybe when you recorded the data your DAWs were set at different sample rates or bit depths. No, that's not the case... maybe I wasn't clear in my description - I was referring to playing back the exact same file through different applications. I know the thread was orginally about recording ONLY, but it had also gotten into playback mechanisms being (theoretically) totally clean & uncolored (and thereore should sound identical), assuming they were all set at "neutral" (which I would assume to mean "zero" on levels, no EQ-ing, no nuthin' else). Why are you insisting that each platform inexplicably alters the data when it inputs it? I'm not necessarily "insisting". I am asking if it is conceiveable that two different companies would have the exact same code instructions as to how to handle an input signal, and if not, could that affect a change in the sound of what gets recorded with respect to different platforms? That was a query, not a position. At 24 bits x 44,100 sample rate, that's over a million variables per second, right? That's a helluva lotta variables, and is it not conceivable that two DAW's, using the same convertors, could indeed interpret things differently? What about things like rounding errors, and how each DAW handles them? I think that could affect a difference in the sound of each recorded signal... am I the only one that thinks this might be possible? Not saying it's a sure thing, because I don't know how you would test it, but maybe POSSIBLE? Hey, perhaps I'm wrong, but then again, pehaps you are too, considering that you're relying on test equipment rather than your ears to make these determinations. the likelihood that your recordings will suck will be a bit higher. Well, there's the condescension that's the unmistakeable hallmark of this newsgroup... darn, I had missed that, as I actually hadn't seen it in some time. Thanks for reminding me where I am: rec-audio-closedmindedindividuals. So I take it that means you've heard all my recordings & determined that they all suck? NeilH |
|
#101
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Well, just for the record, you're shifting the discussion to something else.
The original issue was that the same source recorded (not imported) into different workstations via the same converter sounded different when played back through the same DAW. Right, but someone else (wasn't it you?) had mentioned something about playback between DAW's sounding identical if both/all were set to "neutral" positions (no gain changes or other types of processing applied), so that's what my above stament was addressing. NeilH |
|
#102
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Neil wrote:
Okay, you believe what you believe, but what you are hearing is the differences in your performances and mic placement. That's HUGE--much greater than any subtle difference between DAWs, real or imagined, that people have asserted. Do yourself a favor. Record a guitar pass to tape. Then record that tape into Pro Tools and Nuendo. Compare. At least then you have a fighting chance of isolating the variable you're seeking to understand. That's a good recommendation... Andy, if you're still reading this thread, you ought to try that. NeilH I'm going to keep after this but not sure what is meant..record a pass.then what hold a speaker of it up to a mic into each? I mean somebody will say I moved an inch and that caused the difference. Hey beoieve me, I wanna know that LE sounds as good............it's easier to use for me. My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm |
|
#103
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
I'm going to keep after this but not sure what is meant..record a pass.then
what hold a speaker of it up to a mic into each? No, record from the line out of the tape deck into the line-in's on the convertors. I mean somebody will say I moved an inch and that caused the difference. If you go line-to-line, you could swing the tape machine over your head & they can't say squat lol Neil |
|
#104
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Neil wrote:
I'm going to keep after this but not sure what is meant..record a pass.then what hold a speaker of it up to a mic into each? No, record from the line out of the tape deck into the line-in's on the convertors. Well I have a guitar with a Joe Mills mini condensor in it & I plugged that straight into the front end of the 001 and recorded into both P & N. There's not many variables there to screw it up.The mic doesn't move & I can play the same part consistently. I do admit it was very hard to tell. Not totally convinced yet but it was hard to tell a difference. I mean somebody will say I moved an inch and that caused the difference. If you go line-to-line, you could swing the tape machine over your head & they can't say squat lol Neil My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm |
|
#105
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Mondoslug1 wrote:
Not exactly only it's me with an acoustic trying not to move much........I've done it a zillion times, there's a constant t'thing' going on regardless of whether I moved an inch or two. No, there is not a constant thing going on in the situation you posit, not even close to constant. Right there you have deprived yourself of data that could be meaningful in the context of this discussion. I'll go further and say that you must not have spent a lot of time placing microohones, because if you had and were paying close attention to the changes in sound from fairly miniscule alterations of microphone posiiton you would never make claims of grand differences in sonics from DAWs without using _identical_ information at input. Your task now should be to get back to work and figure out how to achieve direct storage to disk in the relevant DAW's from the same source _recorded simultaneously_ into both systems. -- hank alrich * secret mountain audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement "If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose" |
|
#106
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Neil Henderson wrote:
If you go line-to-line, you could swing the tape machine over your head & they can't say squat lol Don't try this without a helmet, and don't try it with a Studer, Ampex, Otari, or... wait a minute... If you can swing the tape deck over your head it is probably not sutiable for this testing. Well, maybe some Nagras would be okay. -- ha |
|
#107
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Hank wrote:
Mondoslug1 wrote: Not exactly only it's me with an acoustic trying not to move much........I've done it a zillion times, there's a constant t'thing' going on regardless of whether I moved an inch or two. No, there is not a constant thing going on in the situation you posit, not even close to constant. Right there you have deprived yourself of data that could be meaningful in the context of this discussion. I'll go further and say that you must not have spent a lot of time placing microohones, because if you had and were paying close attention to the changes in sound from fairly miniscule alterations of microphone posiiton you would never make claims of grand differences in sonics from DAWs without using _identical_ information at input. Your task now should be to get back to work and figure out how to achieve direct storage to disk in the relevant DAW's from the same source _recorded simultaneously_ into both systems. -- Getting right on it. hank alrich * secret mountain audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement "If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose" My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm |
|
#108
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Sorry, I misidedntified the original poster as Neil, but it was actually Andy I
think. (WillStG) (R Krizman) That's why I've been directing people to the Awesome DAWSUM comparison CD. You'll be hearing those same sorts of differences between files that are bit-identical. Try it. You'll learn a lot about the nature of your own perception. Rick you have to admit though, Neil is isolating one particular thing that isn't usually the focus of concern for people interested in comparing DAWs. We usually concern ourselves with summing busses and processing arcana, but Neil wants to know if different DAWs encode the incoming audio stream differently as the files are recorded. He's playing the files back from a 3rd piece of software for comparitive listening. Maybe he needs a more scientific method, fine, but if he feels they sound different that's probably motive enough to persue a bit of scientific inquiry, no? That's how people learn. Wouldn't if be funny if he stumbled upon something not widely considered, that there is more to encoding a stream of digital audio in a lot of popular software then just straight recording of the output of a digital converter? That would be signifigant, so why not help him to check that hypothesis with a more scientific approach? Stranger things have turned out to be true... Will Miho NY Music & TV Audio Guy Fox And Friends/Fox News "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits Will Miho NY Music & TV Audio Guy Fox And Friends/Fox News "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits |
|
#109
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Sorry, I misidedntified the original poster as Neil, but it was actually Andy
I think. Yeah, it was Andy, but I threw in some postulations early on, as I'm interested in this as well. One thing I didn't know, was that Andy had indeed used two different passes to record with (albiet with identical signal chains), and I'll freely admit that could be the difference he's hearing - I had interpreted (apparently MISinterpreted) his post to mean that he had both apps running at the same time, recording the same pass. I'm curious to see what he comes up with once he records the take to another source (tape?), then records that same take into both apps & compares from there. Having said all that; Will, you mentioned something about the drivers possibly affecting the sound, and so did someone else, so I'm going to see if I can load that other driver into CubaseSX today compare that one with the ASIO driver & see if I hear any difference. If I can (or "think" I can) hear a difference, maybe I'll post a short 30-second segment of a mix through each driver so anyone here who wants to compare can do so. If so, I'll do it in 16/44.1 .wav, not mp3, and I'll keep it short enough so it's not going to be a pain to download if someone's on dial-up. That won't address the recording issue with various apps, or even with various drivers, but it could start to address whether or not a driver can affect the sound at all, so it's still germane to some of the things we've discussed on the thread. NeilH |
|
#110
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Neil Henderson wrote:
One thing I didn't know, was that Andy had indeed used two different passes to record with (albiet with identical signal chains), and I'll freely admit that could be the difference he's hearing Certainly he must eliminate that source of potential error. One may appreciate that placement of an internal guitar mic won't vary significantly for the purpose of auditioning takes. But no matter how consistent are one's back-to-back performances, the chances of delivering bit identical _performances_ probably make Las Vegas adds look really good. -- ha |
|
#111
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
Wouldn't if be funny if he stumbled upon something not widely
considered, that there is more to encoding a stream of digital audio in a lot of popular software then just straight recording of the output of a digital converter? That would be signifigant, so why not help him to check that BRBR I could spend all day checking every logically possible error that a DAW could be committing. My understanding of "how it all works", which I didn't come to with just idle speculation, tells me that there's no issue here. If somebody else thinks there is, by all means, demonstrate it. I'm always willing to be enlightened. As they say in Missouri, "Show me". -R |
|
#112
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
I'm going to keep after this but not sure what is meant..record a pass.then
what hold a speaker of it up to a mic into each? I mean somebody will say I moved an inch and that caused the difference. BRBR No, dude, just go line in into your converter. Hello!!!! -R |
|
#113
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
I'm going to keep after this but not sure what is meant..record a
pass.then what hold a speaker of it up to a mic into each? I mean somebody will say I moved an inch and that caused the difference. No, dude, just go line in into your converter.Hello!!!!-R dewd, I did & I posted about it. My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm |
|
#114
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
R Krizman wrote:
I'm going to keep after this but not sure what is meant..record a pass.then what hold a speaker of it up to a mic into each? I mean somebody will say I moved an inch and that caused the difference. No, dude, just go line in into your converter. j And don't wiggle the wire while the transfer is in progress or you'll induce analomagnelectronetical jitteristical anomalies in your test signal. /j Hello!!!! Gotcha. Will do. -- ha |
|
#115
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
In article , Mondoslug1
wrote: I'm going to keep after this but not sure what is meant..record a pass.then what hold a speaker of it up to a mic into each? I mean somebody will say I moved an inch and that caused the difference. No, dude, just go line in into your converter.Hello!!!!-R dewd, I did & I posted about it. My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm Ok I can't freakin take it anymore!!!!!!!!!! Let's settle it. Ok Pro Tools sucks, sounds like crap and thats why its used on 95% of all records and if you own it you can charge around $50 or more per hour just for an editing rig in your living room. Nuendo is the best, sounds like platinum andthsts why only hobbiests use it and if you own you can charge $.50 and hour people still wont hire the rig even in a million dollar facility. Why does everyone use pro tools? because while they were sleeping digi embeded small DSPS instructional into the 50 top engineer mixers in the country and they receive electrical jolts if they even thnk about using any other platform other than pro tools. Ok you happy? Now rick and I will get back to making music in a format that is used by 95% of the world and you use your toy that is used by 1% of the world. |
|
#116
|
|||
|
|||
|
More of my Nuendo/PT observation
In article , Mondoslug1 wrote: I'm going to keep after this but not sure what is meant..record a pass.then what hold a speaker of it up to a mic into each? I mean somebody will say I moved an inch and that caused the difference. No, dude, just go line in into your converter.Hello!!!!-R dewd, I did & I posted about it. My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm Ok I can't freakin take it anymore!!!!!!!!!! Let's settle it. Ok Pro Tools sucks, sounds like crap and thats why its used on 95% of all records and if you own it you can charge around $50 or more per hour just for an editing rig in your living room. Nuendo is the best, sounds like platinum andthsts why only hobbiests use it and if you own you can charge $.50 and hour people still wont hire the rig even in a million dollar facility. Why does everyone use pro tools? because while they were sleeping digi embeded small DSPS instructional into the 50 top engineer mixers in the country and they receive electrical jolts if they even thnk about using any other platform other than pro tools. Ok you happy? Now rick and I will get back to making music in a format that is used by 95% of the world and you use your toy that is used by 1% of the world. hahaha. easyturbo. I was just curious about the differences if any in sound. I guess it was proven to me that there aren't any. It all sounds the same. Just for the record there is an elite 5 percent using other DAWs though. My tunes at: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Observation. | Audio Opinions | |||
| An Observation about the Krooborg | Audio Opinions | |||
| observation for RAO | Audio Opinions | |||
Linear Mode
