| Author
|
cubase export better than fl's ?
|
Glitch_CapeTown
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
36
Posts :
952
Posted : Feb 24, 2008 02:04
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-02-24 01:22, Mtz Mtzz wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2008-02-24 01:00, Deranger wrote:
Quote:
|
workflow on the other hand cubaseis way behind fl.
what i do in cubase in 2 hours i can do in fl in 45 minutes.
|
|
same for me , workflow in fruity is much better 
|
|
Hmm..don`t know actualy..i used fruity a long time ago..where i had absolutly no idea how to use it proper..now i`m very used to cubase..so i can do things pretty fast..isn`t it just a matter about how your used to the sequencer?or is it a matter of fact that in fruity things can be done much faster?i mean i always use a template session for beginning..where i already prepared a lot of things i always do..so i can start immediatly with everything..just wonder..
|
|
im the same here, i used fruity for years, and the minute i started with cubase, i havent ever opened fruity loops since....
  [[[G|L|I|T|C|H]]]
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Glitch/26959170536?ref=ts
http://www.ektoplazm.com/free-music/glitch-tales-from-the-script
http://www.ektoplazm.com/2011/glitch-higher-definition
http://soundcloud.com/user582143 |
|
|
|
Kadavr
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
88
Posted : Feb 24, 2008 06:00
|
|
Hey recently I've been using Ableton 7 for sequencing, but for some reason still think that sx3 has a better processing engine. How would you recommend for me to finish up the track and the the final mastering in cubase, should I rewire it and record the tracks in cubase, or maybe export each separate track as audio to do the mixdown in sx? |
|
|
|
Glitch_CapeTown
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
36
Posts :
952
Posted : Feb 24, 2008 13:21
|
|
psycox
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
17
Posts :
269
Posted : Feb 24, 2008 14:06
|
i think the difference is the dithering of audio when you export to 16bit/44khz there are different algorithms.
the mixing of audiofiles is only add all samples. there you get differences from the different dB of fl or cubase mixers.
|
|
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : Feb 24, 2008 14:06
|
|
i have read live can t render is output transparently at 24 or 16 bit, they recommend to render at 32 bit, also try the null test , i think there is placebo efffect and all daw sound very close if not the same in the audible range ,it ll not affect the quality of your mix,you can use what you want and do a great mix . |
|
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Feb 24, 2008 22:45
|
FL8 is supposed to have a much better processing engin, at least I read that somewhere in their forum. Also it would be nice if they could allow the rendering of 24 bit files instead of only 16 or 32 bit... that was always one of the major hangups for me, especially as Pro Tools user...
Upavas - Here And Now (Sangoma Rec.) new EP out Oct.29th, get it here:
http://timecode.bandcamp.com
http://upavas.com
http://soundcloud.com/upavas-1/ |
|
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : Feb 25, 2008 01:17
|
i was reading the live manual and i was wrong ,for the best quality they say to render a 32 bit but if you render at the original bit depth there is no loss when dithering disabled .
Kadavr i exported some tracks in live and cubase and they null to - 90 db so the sound should be the same if one is better than a other it s maybe live with the 64 bit engine . |
|
|
|
Kadavr
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
88
Posted : Feb 26, 2008 03:36
|
|
Okay kool nice to know, thanks PoM. |
|
|
|
