[Alistair S]

Cheers, Lzi.

If you find the link, I'd be interested. If not, it doesn't matter. If it works, it works - right?

"Why?" isn't always the most important question.

[Simple Simon]

Lzi, on 24 September 2011 - 08:27 AM, said:

I lke Nuendo, in ways it is much better than PT's but, it'll have a difficult time knocking PT's off of the top of the hill so, I figure...Can't bet 'em, join 'em.

I have long understood that those things that become "industry standards" are very often not the best options available. I have it found it to be true in the computer industry and the graphic design industry, as well as in the music industry. This is because people are sheep-like by nature - we tend to simply do what everyone else seems to be doing. In the design industry it is programs like Photoshop and Illustrator that rule. They are by no means the most powerful and flexible to use, but they are too firmly entrenched to be budged. I haven't been directly involved in the computer industry for many years now, but in my day, IBM ruled in pretty much every major institution - even though they were demonstrably the most cumbersome, costly and inefficient. In the recording industry, of course, Pro Tools (or, as many users have referred to it, "Slow Tools") has enjoyed something close to a monopoly for many years, although that is gradually changing.

Quote

As for all of the blah, blah technical numbers, who cares 64 bit floating-point whatever!

Well actually, I'd suggest that you do since, as you say, "the very most important thing from get go is signal path". In digital recording, 64 bit floating point processing is an essential aspect of that signal path.

[Lzi]

Of course Alstair, I will do just that. I'd like to find the link myself. My problem is there are 4 computers here, and it could be on any one of them.

Simon, the thing is, and this is a very real situation, consider the vast amount of professional studios who have geared up to the tune on thundreds of thousands of dollars. 99% of the studios are all PT's studios. Nobody can afford to back up and start all over again simply because, nobody is going to take that big of a hit in the budget for what most would consider "slight" improvements. We are talking about an entire industry re-tooling here, and that would be an enormous financial burden. Imagine what would occur if every time someone came out with something better the entire industry would have to re-tool! Can't beat 'em, join 'em.

Nuendo IS "better" however, the retailers who have a rlationship with Digidesign are not going to push Nuendo even if they know it is a better platform than PTs. It's a business decision. I DO understand the 64-bit floating point type of thing but, at th end of the day it doesn't make that much difference now anyway. This is the age iMusic, iLove, ipretty-much-everything, the very personification of quantity over quality. We cannot have it both ways my friend, we cannot. Apple destroyed the music industry so that they could give it to the average-computer-user. The question is, Now, what are they doing with it? Now that everyman has the power to make records, why don't they make better records than ever before IF this "everymans-recording-studio is so much better than it ever was? Apple executives are the new rock stars. They have built a monopoly. Time will tell if it stands. I know one thing, when someone reaches the pinnnicle, the top of the mountain, everyone else rushes to knock them down. Sooner or later it WILL happen. What goes up, must come down. Every man doesn't have any power, Apple does! Who is making the money here? Apple is! Are artists so much better off? Nope. Apple is. Thatis the long and short of it. Does Apple do what it does because Apple loves music? Of course, not. Apple LOVES yur money! Apple KILLED music so that it could be a big fat rat.

Who wants to rescue the music? Yeah? Toss your mac over a bridge and into a river. Don't buy into the Apple lie. You don't like Apple but, you'd like to learn PTs? Run PTs on a PC, I do!

Nuendo, PTs, Logic. Hm, which platform should you choose? Choose one of the 'big boys" stay away from the mid-level stuff if you can. Sure, it all works but, if you want to maybe one day "play with the big boys" then take Logic over Sonor or Cubase. There are very powerful reasons why to choose PTs. Are these reasons justified? Depends upon what your goals are. You don't like PTs? Try Logic. You aren't into the Digidesign style, choose Nuendo. How many interviews have you read with a top producer who is using say, Sonor or Cubase? Exactly. I know a lot of guys on here are using Reaper. Whatever it takes to get it done but, consider this, the industry will not change, it is what it is. If this is just somebodys hobby it's whatever but, if, there is any degree of seriousness at all to what yu do, do not delay, go with one of the big boy software packages.

Cheap never makes better records people, even if you want it to. If this were the truth everybody and their mothers cat would have studios full of Behringer gear and they'd all be running the free version of Reaper now wouldn't they? I mean, in real production, the bottom line ($$$) is everything right? Wrong. If someone cannot hear the difference between this-that-and the other thing tell me, why the hell are they are rying to make records in the first place?

[Simple Simon]

Lzi, on 27 September 2011 - 05:16 AM, said:

I know a lot of guys on here are using Reaper. Whatever it takes to get it done but, consider this, the industry will not change, it is what it is. If this is just somebodys hobby it's whatever but, if, there is any degree of seriousness at all to what yu do, do not delay, go with one of the big boy software packages.

This is exactly what I was talking about, and it's all about perception.

[Lzi]

Simple Simon, on 26 September 2011 - 02:25 PM, said:

Lzi, on 27 September 2011 - 05:16 AM, said:

I know a lot of guys on here are using Reaper. Whatever it takes to get it done but, consider this, the industry will not change, it is what it is. If this is just somebodys hobby it's whatever but, if, there is any degree of seriousness at all to what yu do, do not delay, go with one of the big boy software packages.

This is exactly what I was talking about, and it's all about perception.

Indeed.

This does bring up a point: The "good" thing is, most of what you learn on one DAW transfers to any other DAW so when it's time for PTs, Nuendo or, Logic it's just a new workflow. Use the free stuff until you need the big boy software. If someone does happen to create something which someone wants to use in whatever professional manner, it can always be transfered into a big boy DAW by whoever re-mixes it, and it will get re-mixed, count on it. HERE'S THE POINT... Just make certain that you have WAV copies of every track because, you WILL be needing them should something like this happen to you. This is a very good reason why people should learn how to properly label everything as well. The more notes you take, the better. Send your notes with your tracks. And hey, this is one time when I WILL wish that this senario might happen to you! BUT, better to be ready if it happens than, not to be when it does.

[Scotto]

While I currently have an old version of PT LE I was thinking of taking a machine and loading Ubuntu studio on it for fun. What are the opinions of something like Ardour 2? I know it is free but you have to know UNIX to run it... which I do.

[Alistair S]

I've never used Ardour, but have heard good things about it. As far as Linux is concerned, I think it's useable, but I'd be bothered about things like firewire support. I'm just not convinced it's ideal for audio yet. You may have discovered differently, though - and it sounds as if you may have the familiarity with the OS I lack, and have no desire to mess around with and learn.

Lzi, I think it needs to be said that Reaper isn't free (for anyone who may be thinking of using it). It does, however, have a very good pricing policy, especially for non-commercial users. There are plenty of commercial users too, by the way. There is no reason people would need to turn to "big boy" DAWs - in fact, there are growing numbers of studios who are turning to Reaper from those DAWS .. because is is more stable and more flexible. There are, of course, times when everyone needs to work with people who use a different DAW, but it is relatively easy to do, whatever the other party is using.

[Simple Simon]

Alistair S, on 27 September 2011 - 10:06 AM, said:

Lzi, I think it needs to be said that Reaper isn't free (for anyone who may be thinking of using it). It does, however, have a very good pricing policy, especially for non-commercial users. There are plenty of commercial users too, by the way. There is no reason people would need to turn to "big boy" DAWs - in fact, there are growing numbers of studios who are turning to Reaper from those DAWS .. because is is more stable and more flexible. There are, of course, times when everyone needs to work with people who use a different DAW, but it is relatively easy to do, whatever the other party is using.

Indeed.

I find the idea of "big boy" DAWs quite amusing, inasmuch as it seems to imply that Reaper is a "little boy" DAW

Having used Nuendo (extensively), Logic (a little) in the past, and Reaper (almost exclusively these days) I would in no way consider Reaper to be "little boy" software. I certainly have no desire to return to Nuendo as my primary DAW of choice.

[Lzi]

Alistair S, on 26 September 2011 - 06:06 PM, said:

I've never used Ardour, but have heard good things about it. As far as Linux is concerned, I think it's useable, but I'd be bothered about things like firewire support. I'm just not convinced it's ideal for audio yet. You may have discovered differently, though - and it sounds as if you may have the familiarity with the OS I lack, and have no desire to mess around with and learn.

Lzi, I think it needs to be said that Reaper isn't free (for anyone who may be thinking of using it). It does, however, have a very good pricing policy, especially for non-commercial users. There are plenty of commercial users too, by the way. There is no reason people would need to turn to "big boy" DAWs - in fact, there are growing numbers of studios who are turning to Reaper from those DAWS .. because is is more stable and more flexible. There are, of course, times when everyone needs to work with people who use a different DAW, but it is relatively easy to do, whatever the other party is using.

[quote name='Simple Simon' date='26 September 2011 - 07:21 PM' timestamp='1317079309' post='556422']

Alistair S, on 27 September 2011 - 10:06 AM, said:

Lzi, I think it needs to be said that Reaper isn't free (for anyone who may be thinking of using it). It does, however, have a very good pricing policy, especially for non-commercial users. There are plenty of commercial users too, by the way. There is no reason people would need to turn to "big boy" DAWs - in fact, there are growing numbers of studios who are turning to Reaper from those DAWS .. because is is more stable and more flexible. There are, of course, times when everyone needs to work with people who use a different DAW, but it is relatively easy to do, whatever the other party is using.

Indeed.

I find the idea of "big boy" DAWs quite amusing, inasmuch as it seems to imply that Reaper is a "little boy" DAW

Having used Nuendo (extensively), Logic (a little) in the past, and Reaper (almost exclusively these days) I would in no way consider Reaper to be "little boy" software. I certainly have no desire to return to Nuendo as my primary DAW of choice.

Gentlemen,

I in no way mean to imply that Reaper isn't an extraordinary piece of software. What I meant to imply was that in an industry which is tooled up on Protools/Digidesign there are not many who will be willing to switch considering the very large outlay of funds it takes to properly set up a Protools HD room nobody in LA or Nashville who has made such a significant investment is going to do an about face that easily. I am certain Reaper will do what any other DAW will do. They all do much same procedures, any differences between DAWs are mostly a workflow issues IMHO. With software, I believe it is largely a matter of what we get used to. It really no different than guitars. Begin on a Les Paul and hances are you will always love Les Pauls. Basic human nature. Familiarity breeds comfort, and comfort sells.

Yes, it is easy to transfer from one DAW into another. The big mix guys in LA are pretty much all running PTs or Logic.

Digidesign gets on my nerves. Their hardware is terribly expensive. And why, I cannot figure out myself. Ever price just the I/O for an HD system? Crazy. You would think you had something much better than an old MCI board and a 2" 16 track machine but, you really don't. The great strength of digital recording has never been the sound, it is the tremendous editing power which made digital take flight. The MCI board/2"/16 track would CRUSH PTs or any DAW system in terms of sound quality however, when it comes time to edit, and I hand you a handful of razor blades, you will understand how digital took over. Any kid in his bedroom can become a professional level editor on a DAW. With razor blades though? Not going to happen overnight. Digital is in effect RECORDING FOR DUMMIES. The fact that anyone can learn how to use a DAW makes the sound quality issue something most will easily sacrifice just because, they can now do something which they never had the opportunity to be involved with before. And, most of those who readily agree to this sacrifice have no clear idea of what they are doing. Most beginning recordists have no clear idea what sound quality even is for God's sake so, in truth, their recording journey begins someplace in the middle, works towards the end but, before ever reaching their intended destination, they learn they must begin at the beginning after all. There is no magic in any DAW. The magic is within you!

"BIG BOY" "littleboy" are merely terms I used because, believe it or not, this is how it is all set up. The most popular DAW is the one which came out first, it's no different than potatoe chips. People are like sheep, they love to follow and they readily will if you lead them! PTs did exactly that. In southern California PTs is king. In NYC PTs is king. I assume in Nashville it is not much different. Digidesign "enslaved" an industry with its pricey hardware, and now they will fight tooth, fang, and nail to retain their advantage. They began this game with their pieces already arranged on the board. Hard to overcome the advantage they hold. Funny thing is, their advantage has absolutely nothing to do with software, it's the hardware that holds them all captive. All I can tell you is, in DC projects came through which had to be converted into Nuendo from all manner of DAWs. In SoCal, everyone seems to be running PTs. I know on guy here who uses Sonor but he doesn't really know what he is doing with it lol.

[Alistair S]

Yeah.. as I think Simon said, there was a time in the computer industry when there was a saying, "Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM". It was true, too.

Things do change, of course

[Simple Simon]

Lzi, on 28 September 2011 - 02:16 AM, said:

I in no way mean to imply that Reaper isn't an extraordinary piece of software. What I meant to imply was that in an industry which is tooled up on Protools/Digidesign there are not many who will be willing to switch considering the very large outlay of funds it takes to properly set up a Protools HD room nobody in LA or Nashville who has made such a significant investment is going to do an about face that easily.Familiarity breeds comfort, and comfort sells.

Fair comment on all counts.
Digidesign gets on my nerves. Their hardware is terribly expensive. And why, I cannot figure out myself. [quote] I'd suggest that you have already identified the "why" of their expense; it's that psychological monopoly they currently enjoy within the industry. They can charge a fortune for the simple reason that people are willing to accept paying a fortune because it's the "Industry Standard". Adobe do exactly the same with maybe of their products, especially in the design world and, again, people pay it because it's the safe, easy and comfortable option - regardless of ridiculous cost.

Quote

Funny thing is, their advantage has absolutely nothing to do with software, it's the hardware that holds them all captive.

Again, agreed. And there was once a very good reason for this - particularly when it came to PCs. These days, however, with far more inexpensive processing power in our computers, there is far less justification for that investment in expensive PT hardware.

Alistair S, on 28 September 2011 - 09:06 AM, said:

Yeah.. as I think Simon said, there was a time in the computer industry when there was a saying, "Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM". It was true, too.

Hahahaha! I'd actually forgotten that line, which is a bit silly of me. Back in "the day", I had a job for a while that involved attempting to sell a computer system that was, to IBM, something of a parallel to what Reaper is in comparison to Pro Tools. That was the first time I personally encountered this idea of a psychological monopoly. Everyone knew and acknowledged that IBM was over-priced crap, but very few had the balls to embrace an alternative - regardless of the potential financial benefits of doing so. It was also around the time that I started to understand that people's decision-making is generally based far more on emotion and subjectivity than it is on objective facts.

[FunkDaddy]

Lzi, on 27 September 2011 - 10:16 AM, said:

Digidesign gets on my nerves. Their hardware is terribly expensive. And why, I cannot figure out myself.

You've been explaining why in your last couple posts my man. Pro Tools was here first, it got into the big studios first and it made it's name as the only choice for "serious" recording...the very myth you are perpetuating here. Go onto any "Newbie" section of a recording forum and 99% of the "How do I start" threads will begin with "I mean, I know I need Pro Tools..."

They charge the amount of money for their hardware because people continue their marketing scam that they are the "serious" choice. I mean...is Pro Tools even 64-bit yet? No. But just like Waves, people keep buying into their hype and don't demand that they get with the times.

[Lzi]

FunkDaddy, on 28 September 2011 - 06:28 PM, said:

Lzi, on 27 September 2011 - 10:16 AM, said:

Digidesign gets on my nerves. Their hardware is terribly expensive. And why, I cannot figure out myself.

You've been explaining why in your last couple posts my man. Pro Tools was here first, it got into the big studios first and it made it's name as the only choice for "serious" recording...the very myth you are here. Go onto any "Newbie" section of a recording forum and 99% of the "How do I start" threads will begin with "I mean, I know I need Pro Tools..."

They charge the amount of money for their hardware because people continue their marketing scam that they are the "serious" choice. I mean...is Pro Tools even 64-bit yet? No. But just like Waves, people keep buying into their hype and don't demand that they get with the times.

How am I perpetuating a myth? It is not a myth. The myth here is, that some upstart software platform can ever overcome PTs position in the industry. Have you been to an LA studio my dude? Been to NYC? Same situation there as well, PTs rules. PTs is definately king, not dreaming about being king. And yes, they were there first with Sound Designer which later became PTs. Yeah, there are platforms which I believe are better but so what? I think amps are better than amp sims too but, that doesn't stop everyone from using them does it? Or from saying that they "can't hear a difference." lol

Let me get one thing straight, if it were my choice, I'd have stuck with Nuendo. Why though? Everyone around me here uses PTs. So....it's a no-brainer for me.

Yes, 99% of newbie posts will mention Pro Tools. Trouble is, 98.999% of those who mention that they need PTs, don't mention the fact that they NEED to find some talent first! PTs does not perform miricles or, write music for you. Yet anyway.

My thing is, can't beat 'em, better join 'em. You may convieniently say this or that platform is better but, that doesn't make them industry standards though, and the sad fact is, squatters rights are very difficult to overcome. I've no doubt whatsoever that there is something better than PTs, I've used it! It is called Nuendo. I haven't used Reaper, and I doubt its earth-shattering. It's all what you get used to. Familiarity is a powerful drug. I say, it shouldn't matter what you record a song into, it's the song which matters in the end isn't it? How it was created does not matter to most people, and no, most listeners couldn't give a rats ass about the technicalities of recording music, or, if it was made on a 64 bit floating point system or a 32 bit floating point system. At the end of the day all that matters is the music. In 10 years we may be recording onto who knows, something called "Air Bender" that requires no gear whatsoever. Who is to say. It will change though, things always change. And when change inevitably comes the important facts about recording wil not change. You'll have to begin with the songs just as you do right now. It was the same with tape, songs come first. At the end of the day they all end up as crappy mp3's anyway with poor resolution. Yep, everybody now has the power to record now, albeit at a lower level of fidelity. It doesn't matter though, the market is fully conditioned to the dumed-down sound of todays music already, and it is what it is. Bitching about PTs will not change the fact that it sits firmly atop of the mountain. Is it marketing? it Is business strategy? Is it some technical reason? Thing is, it never matter why it is, just that it is what it is, and PTs is king like it or not. I am not here to proclaim PTs as the best thing since white bread, and I never will. No software platform matters in the end, none of them has their own sound so, what's the big deal here? A loyalty thing? That's ridiculous. I cannot have loyalty to something I cannot place my hands upon. It's software for God's sake. The TRUTH lies within you or it does not at all. If you can make music it should matter what you are given to make it with, you just make it. If I have a $99 ART preamp and thats all I have, I will use it, and I will get a good sound in the end. If I have an NPNG stereo unit, I'll use it. It'll matter very little in the end to whoever is listening to the music. Sure, it matters agreat deal to me but...how many others will care about it like I do? I am not here to sell ProTools. The true issue is getting beyond the software, beyond the gear. The point is THIS IS A LISTENING THING NOT SOMETHING THAT SIMPLY COMES IN A BOX. This requires one thing first, that you train your ears, and there are no shortcuts even though they will most likely have a plugin that claims to do evrything for you soon lol. $hyt dude, hey are still chasing analog sound with plugin simulations, what does this tell you? The intelligent thing to do is to let them all talk while you make music because, not much of the chatter matters. If you are serious about this, leave the PTs war behind you and just make music. If I mix a song in Reaper and I mix the same song again in PTs, chances are both mixes will sound very similar even though I will have used different plugins to make both mixes. Why will it sound similar? How? Because, I made the mix...Simple. It's an Ear thing, not a gear thing, and this goes double when it comes to software, double my dude. The software though powerful is quite insignificant in the end. Getting beyond this insane notion of brand loyalty is such a vital step forward...TAKE IT. All that matters here are your ears my dude. Without your ears, you are lost. The chatter, chatter, chatter is just that, akin to crows squawking in your front yard. Listen to he music within never to the crows.

This is a cool thread. I like talking about mixing because, it truly is an ear thing first and foremost. The chatter is just the sales reps trying to seel their wares. They are little more than carnival barkers, do not listen to them. Listen with your heart first. Hereis where perception lies. Just close your eyes and lose yourself in the sound, forget the hows, and the ways, just listen. Silence all of the nonesensical marketing chatter. You have what you have, so, do what you do.

[Simple Simon]

You said that you couldn't understand why Pro Tools hardware is so expensive, Lzi. All Funky and I have pointed out is that you have already answered your own question. Here you do it again:

Lzi, on 30 September 2011 - 03:28 AM, said:

My thing is, can't beat 'em, better join 'em.

This is the very attitude that has, for many years now, allowed Pro Tools to get away with providing a sub-standard product (in terms of the software at least) at inflated prices.

Here, for me though, is the quote of the thread so far: "I haven't used Reaper, and I doubt its earth-shattering."

I wouldn't suggest, for a minute, that Reaper is "Earth-shattering" and I doubt if anyone else here would either. What Reaper is, though, is a perfectly viable alternative (many, including professionals, would argue a better alternative) to DAWs such as PT or Nuendo* at a fraction of the cost, and with a great deal more responsiveness to its users' demands and needs. That's all.

(*interestingly, while I have seen countless examples of people moving to Reaper from Pro Tools, and a few from Nuendo, I have heard of very few switching from Logic. I think this is at least partly because Logic users have long enjoyed the kinds of routing flexibility and system stability that helps distinguish Reaper from the other two. Also, the new approach to comping introduced in Logic 8 blows all the others, including Reaper, out of the water in this department. If I had an unlimited budget, I reckon I'd probably be using Logic).

[Alistair S]

Agree with that.

Also agree with the "you could use any of them and come up with something equally good" argument.

Regarding PT, I think it would be helpful if more distinction was drawn between PTHD and .. for example .. PTLE.

[FunkDaddy]

Lzi, on 29 September 2011 - 11:28 AM, said:

How am I perpetuating a myth? It is not a myth. The myth here is, that some upstart software platform can ever overcome PTs position in the industry. Have you been to an LA studio my dude? Been to NYC? Same situation there as well, PTs rules. PTs is definately king, not dreaming about being king. And yes, they were there first with Sound Designer which later became PTs. Yeah, there are platforms which I believe are better but so what? I think amps are better than amp sims too but, that doesn't stop everyone from using them does it? Or from saying that they "can't hear a difference." lol

I was just answering why Digidesign can gouge prices for their hardware. Though I think that's somewhat over now that (I believe?) Pro Tools 9 isn't handcuffed to Digidesign hardware. Though I do believe Pro Tools HD still requires it and thus, they can still charge whatever they want.

The myth I'm talking about you perpetuating is that people need to use Pro Tools if they are serious. There's lots of home recordists that are serious, who put lots of money into their studio design and equipment, who don't use Pro Tools. You won't hear a difference in their mixes if they had used PT instead of Cakewalk or Logic or Reaper. Though if people are spending serious money on setting up a commercial studio they'd probably invest in a Pro Tools rig simply because that's what's expected by their customers.

I've never been in a studio in L.A. or NYC. I've been in one in Toronto but to be honest, can't remember what software they used. I was a young dude way too impressed with the guy talking about the vintage console he had saved from another studio going out of business. And the tattooed lesbian explaining how she was mic'ing up my drums.

I had a funny argument on JPF recently with somebody who was convinced that you needed Pro Tools or Logic to get a "pro" sound. I repeatedly asked him to explain how Pro Tools recorded sound differently than Reaper (for argument's sake, since I use it) and he would never answer. He just said "You get what you pay for" over and over...myth revealed.

[Scotto]

Best local studio here in my area uses pro tool.... 6.7! Really old version with all the plug ins running on some G4's in the other room (because they sound like jet engines). The huge analog board and all that is what makes the sound there supposedly. It works and the guys done some things that have gone national. Use what you know and what your comfortable with.

[FunkDaddy]

Burnin Sven, on 01 October 2011 - 04:58 PM, said:

I think Reaper is one H of a program but after bouncing the same file in Reaper and Logic the result I got from Reaper wasnt in fact sounding as good as the Logic one. Strange but true at least for me, the other guys wouldnt believe though .

How did it sound different? The differences in how one DAW is programmed to render audio versus another don't create audible differences. All things equal. I'd have to say you were hearing something you wanted to hear, but wasn't actually there. On a minute, minuscule scale there are differences, but as a human, you simply wouldn't be able to hear it.

[Simple Simon]

Burnin Sven, on 02 October 2011 - 08:58 AM, said:

I think Reaper is one H of a program but after bouncing the same file in Reaper and Logic the result I got from Reaper wasnt in fact sounding as good as the Logic one.

I'd need to know more about what you mean by "bouncing" the same file before I could really comment. Just exactly what kinds of processing took place, and what steps were taken to ensure that both programs were being asked to do exactly the same thing? Even such a small thing as a difference in pan law applied to the master bus can alter the end result in tests such as these.

To me, the ultimate test in such a scenario would be to line the two results up , put one of them out of phase to the other, and then play them back at a high level. If the result is complete silence, there is no difference between the two. If something is heard audibly, there is probably reason to start asking why. Anything else is purely subjective.

[Alistair S]

While there are a bunch of different ways to bounce/render files (and different formats, sample rates, etc.), I suspect that the difference you heard was down to different pan laws (which can be set to your preference).

Once you have ensured that any two DAWs are operating the same way, the result should always be identical and will null - or one is broken. I've yet to come across any that aren't identical in terms of output.

[Lzi]

Alistair S, on 03 October 2011 - 05:17 AM, said:

While there are a bunch of different ways to bounce/render files (and different formats, sample rates, etc.), I suspect that the difference you heard was down to different pan laws (which can be set to your preference).

Once you have ensured that any two DAWs are operating the same way, the result should always be identical and will null - or one is broken. I've yet to come across any that aren't identical in terms of output.

I will second Alstair. I have yet to hear one DAW which has a "sound" of its own. This is the one thing I really like about digital recording. You get what you put in, and nothing more. Want color? You have to add the color at source, the machine in't going to add anything for you. This is any DAW. You can change instruments, change mics, change mic amps, any processing that is in the signal path but, the DAW isn't going to give you anything special in terms of tonality. When you want color you have to cut the color or wait and use an plug later. Me, I'm not much good at waiting, In effect I mix as I crecord. By the time I sit down to mix, quite a lot of the mixing has already taken place. I'll have done quite a lot of the work as I go. It doesn't matter what platform I work on, it will sound like me in the end, not like the program.

Logic seems to be a wonderful program Simon.

I am not the type of guy who is going to swear by anything I cannot place my hands upon, and this must include software of any brand. For me, it's all a big bowl of the very same soup. The routing is the main difference. It's no different with a large frame mixing console. The thing which truly distinguishes one from another are the routing options. Sure, there is a distinct tonal difference between working on an SSL board or a Neve board. Beyond the sound of the board though is the routing. Signal path is what really matters. You can find any sound that you seek as long as you invest yourself in the seeking. Laying the importance at the feet of a DAW is absolutely ridiculous. The music lives withinn YOU! The difference lies within you. It is delusion to believe that it lives within a computer, a tape deck or anywhere else. Mistake #1 is to believe that any of this stuff is more important than the gift which is already within you.

Protools, Nuendo, Logic, Reaper, Sonor... None of these platforms can do anything do anything unless I ask it to, and this is the truth. The power is within you, it will never live within your computer. Believing otherwise is the beginning of delusion. A digital recording platform is no different than a tape machine, both performs do the same tasks. Tape has its own sound, digital does not. The thing I'll never understand is why, oh WHY, once we choose digital must we chase plugins which emulate the sound of tape? LOL It's akin to wiping out all species of deer and then wondering why you miss the taste of venison. The funny part is, the sound of your music is within you and no machine or software is going to find it if you cannot first find it yourself. I will never be a big fan of software, it's too much like fast food, here today, gone tomorrow. Never attached to anything you cannot touch with your hands because, it is not real. I am not saying anybodys software is "BAD." It's just not that big of a deal. Nothing is more important than the music inside of you and if someone cannot see this first they will never be able to make a decent recording. The science of all of this is not enough to make a great recording, it's just not enough to get the job done. The importance lies with the music not in how it is captured. Once I have captured dinner nobody cares how wonderful my snare was! All that matters is how good the meat tastes. Music is no different. In order to really become immersed within your music you absolutely must come beyond placing so much iportance upon the method of capture. You must forget all that you've learned and just simply be the music's medium so to speak, just let it flow through you, channel it to life. Music has a life force, a spirit, it is every bit as as alive as fire is. Music is like my dog. When I want her to lay down I do not have to speak, I simply press my palm towards the floor and she lies down. Music is also an intuitive process. Never lose sight of this.

Everyone likes to bash Protools. This is just human nature. If you cliimb a mountain and stand on its peak inevitably someone will desire to knock you down. Face facts. Protools was first. and without PTs none of these other DAWs would have had anything to follow.

Tattooed lesbians miking drums huh? Hm...Did she figure out which end of the XLR cables were male and which were female? God help us all man! LOL Big vintage consoles would be more interesting to me. Tattooed lesbians are an everyday visual in southern California lmfao. I'd rather play with an old Neve board myself. At least on one of Ruperts creations, there is no confusion, inputs are for input, and out put means output. Damn dude, that is not a very pretty picture first thing in the morning. LOL Tattoed lesbians miking drums...OMG dude! The tales those microphones could probably tell. That's one way to keep musicians from touching the microphones! Ah!

[FunkDaddy]

Sven, it's pretty simple, if you could hear a difference in the resulting files, then there were settings you should have changed to make the "test" more accurate. It's probably the fact that you "did nothing" that made them sound different as the programs were set up differently to begin with. Especially if all you did was import them and bounce them out.

[Simple Simon]

Burnin Sven, on 03 October 2011 - 11:13 AM, said:

The guys on the swedish forum said the same but I never did that test.

I presume you're talking about the test of putting the results against each other, out of phase, to see if there is any audio output? Logically, to me, that should be the first test. If there is no audible output, the tracks are identical - end of story. If there is some audible output, the next step is to use a scientific process to identify and limit the variables in order to determine the reasons for that result.

[Alistair S]

The point is, they don't start with the same defaults.

Pan laws, in particular, are different. This will effect how the same track sounds (whether you bounce/render it or not). Many start with -3 or -6 (Logic is, I think -3). Reaper, by default, is zero.

To compare, you DO need to check all the settings are the same (not sure if this equals "calibration").

[Scotto]

Alistair S, on 07 October 2011 - 07:56 PM, said:

The point is, they don't start with the same defaults.

Pan laws, in particular, are different. This will effect how the same track sounds (whether you bounce/render it or not). Many start with -3 or -6 (Logic is, I think -3). Reaper, by default, is zero.

To compare, you DO need to check all the settings are the same (not sure if this equals "calibration").

So really that test just determined that some programs presets are better out of the box than others. Not an entirely useless endeavor. You could at least say this DAW gets you closest out of the box blah blah...

[FunkDaddy]

Scotto, on 08 October 2011 - 01:21 AM, said:

Alistair S, on 07 October 2011 - 07:56 PM, said:

The point is, they don't start with the same defaults.

Pan laws, in particular, are different. This will effect how the same track sounds (whether you bounce/render it or not). Many start with -3 or -6 (Logic is, I think -3). Reaper, by default, is zero.

To compare, you DO need to check all the settings are the same (not sure if this equals "calibration").

So really that test just determined that some programs presets are better out of the box than others. Not an entirely useless endeavor. You could at least say this DAW gets you closest out of the box blah blah...

Or you could say it'll do you a disservice by making your songs sound "better" without you knowing how. I'd rather know which default settings are making the file sound more polished. Wouldn't you?

[Alistair S]

I think it just says that they are different.

Everything else is just preference.

Here are some pan laws:

Left 0 - Middle 0 - Right 0
Left 0 - Middle -3 - Right 0
Left 0 - Middle -4.5 - Right 0
Left 0 - Middle -6 - Right 0
Left +3 - Middle 0 - Right +3

Then add in the variation that each may have sinusoidal tapers, etc .. oh, and there is mono vs stereo panning - and what do you get?

Which is "best"? I'd say that's impossible to answer. However, it's best to have the choice!

More info here .. http://www.harmonyce...m/docs/DOC-1106

[Alistair S]

Can I suggest two things? First, check out the article I linked above.

Second, load a stereo track in Sonar and play it. Now change the pan law (let's make it mono, -6 centre) and play it again. You will hear a difference. Try different pan laws and experiment. THIS is why it is important to match them.

Get them matched and I'll bet that the outputs from both Logic and Reaper will null (assuming other stuff like sample rate is all the same on your soundcard and in the file).

[Alistair S]

Burnin Sven, on 10 October 2011 - 06:59 PM, said:

Seems Logic defaults to - 3db compensated and if Reaper defaults 0 db it makes it even more strange the Logic "bounce" sounded "better".

Not too surprising. Imagine taking your mix and putting a stereo field plug on it and then pushing the centre up by 3db (or reducing the sides by 3db) and it will upset the mix.

In Reaper, most people choose how they want panning (pan law and pan mode) to be and then set that as the default (and, like Logic, it can change from the default on each track - after all, you will want different pan modes for stereo and mono tracks).

As it happens, I default to -3db compensated too - so we should be fine!