| Author
|
cubase vs. ableton live
|
Agorit
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
114
Posted : Sep 22, 2013 00:48
|
|
I dont know why, but i seen more often old producers consider move to ableton. I saw a interview of captain hook today and he said it. He produces in cubase but thinking change to live. |
|
|
SISMIC
Sismic
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
82
Posted : Sep 22, 2013 02:01
|
Quote:
|
On 2013-09-21 15:48, ierofante wrote:
During my 13 years experience in the studio, i learnt something; I can assure you that Cubase has a WAY better mixing algorythm than Ableton.
Yes, Cubase sounds better.
However, I found the workflow in Ableton much more appealing to compose good and original electronic music.
So, my advice is to use both of them and take the best of both. If you can buy only one, buy Ableton, because surely composition is much more important than audio quality, IMO.
|
|
Hi, have you de-warped the wav's after the import?...if you don't, Ableton by default when you drag or import a file, warp the file to the current bpms, automatically, ever if the bpm's are the same daw/file, not mathematically exactly the same btw, because there is no same bpm in floating point files ex.:145 bpm are 145,xxxxxx, so live tend to warp and you get weird exports, if you want transparent render/export, de-warp every file and export.
my 2 cents
 http://soundcloud.com/sismic-stuff |
|
|
|
smoker
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
115
Posts :
873
Posted : Sep 22, 2013 03:44
|
Quote:
|
I had your same thought. How can be possibile that a DAW sound best/worst than another?
I had. Since I tried this little experiment.
I took the multitrack of one of my songs. Exported all the tracks at 0 db, without any eq or compression.
Loaded the tracks in an Ableton project, then exported the master; loaded the tracks in Cubase, then exported.
If you compare the two, you can definitely hear lot of differences. Cubase seem to have a more definite and trasparent mix, and a cleaner low-mid range, more definite highs...
If you have a chance, try to do this yourself. You don't have to take my words for granted, you can try this little experiment.
I also noticed that many VST respond to Cubase in a total different way if compared to Ableton.
For example, I used a famous bass enhancer to pump a *.wav file of a psy bassline. If set to -21db in Ableton, it already sounds bassy and muddy; in Cubase, with the same *.wav when I set the bass enhancer to -18db, it still sound great and with no muddyness.
It is not a small difference IMO
|
|
+1000
-------------------------------------------------
https://soundcloud.com/user-537936268 |
|
|
|
ierofante
Started Topics :
6
Posts :
253
Posted : Sep 22, 2013 14:31
|
Dear Sismic, yes, of course I disabled warp 
About the second test... I'll try to explain better.
I took THE SAME EXACT wave file, that was a psy-bass loop made by me (but it could have been also my grandpa farting... no matter).
I put the same wave file in both DAWs at 0dbfs, then I put on the chain the same bass enhancer with the same setting in both the DAWs.
The result is the following; in ableton, the bass sounds very boomy (and muddy) already at -21db "intensity" (it is a parameter of the bass enhancer), when in cubase it still sounds good and clear even at -18db intensity and higher.
Any clue?
Fire Walk With Me |
|
|
|
Kolishin Methud
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
266
Posted : Sep 22, 2013 14:35
|
in the quality department of both, i say they are 98% the same... there IS a audible difference, although very slight and sometimes not even audible.
Live tends to have a "warmer" sound. so it can easily muddy up your subs and bass's if not careful.
Cubase from what i hear to my ears. doesn't have that warmth, theirfor its still alot more accurate audio wise while mixing, simply because you are hearing what you are really generating. there won't be any warmth unless you add warmth to it.
ableton had a funky way of doing that, like i said its slight and if you work in styles of sound it will be quite audible (low mids and bass mostly) but that's litterially the ONLY thing i heard different. The reason I was told live processes audio this way is because since it was originally made as "live performance" software the output is already set up to sound warm and silky... weather its true or not i haven't a clue haha but its a interesting theory, i could believe it too!
i wouldn't let that 1-2% of difference in sound effect anything though, seriously now days live is so integrated with some of the best tools around if you know how to mix it won't really make a difference at all.
Mind you also alot of the "sound" difference people think they hear from live also has to do with the warping being engaged, so it sounds bad if the warp is left on and the markers are all over the place!! that and the simple fact that when you render/bounce/export your final audio live has some dither options set up by default. personally i always render in WAV without any dither. just because it sometimes can add to that warm silky sound. So most of the time that makes up for the reason of that sound. But even when thats off it will still retain that slightly warmer sound! very VERY slight but its there to my ears 
http://soundcloud.com/brentmalik |
|
|
|
SISMIC
Sismic
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
82
Posted : Sep 22, 2013 17:49
|
Quote:
|
On 2013-09-22 14:31, ierofante wrote:
Dear Sismic, yes, of course I disabled warp
About the second test... I'll try to explain better.
I took THE SAME EXACT wave file, that was a psy-bass loop made by me (but it could have been also my grandpa farting... no matter).
I put the same wave file in both DAWs at 0dbfs, then I put on the chain the same bass enhancer with the same setting in both the DAWs.
The result is the following; in ableton, the bass sounds very boomy (and muddy) already at -21db "intensity" (it is a parameter of the bass enhancer), when in cubase it still sounds good and clear even at -18db intensity and higher.
Any clue?
|
|
ok, thank you for your tests, now because i use ableton from 8 years after work on logic and cubase, just for workflow, and i think there is no difference, but, i have to made this accurate tests, can you please write what bass enhancer you use, and cubase version and ableton version? it's not a problem for me to switch from one to another if you're comparison it's really true...
Also Kolishin Methud, yes dither and normalize that are default in render window!
After i post my last tune with my last settings for the bassline, and we try to see if this BIG issue is true, really bad eheh i have dynaudio speakers so i notice the difference hence in the spectrum, let's see http://soundcloud.com/sismic-stuff |
|
|
|
Agorit
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
114
Posted : Sep 22, 2013 18:07
|
|
Kolishin; what u want to say when u said that live had a warmer sound? If u play a sine wave in any vst in ableton u get harmonics? If u talk about the export/bounce proccess , the physics show me that i have the same sound when bounce in cubase ableton and logic |
|
|
|
frisbeehead
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
1352
Posted : Sep 23, 2013 04:05
|
Quote:
|
On 2013-09-22 18:07, Agorit wrote:
Kolishin; what u want to say when u said that live had a warmer sound? If u play a sine wave in any vst in ableton u get harmonics? If u talk about the export/bounce proccess , the physics show me that i have the same sound when bounce in cubase ableton and logic
|
|
and you should. there can be some differences on the summing of sounds however, even though - to be honest - I'm really no expert on this subject. but it makes sense that different daws use (sometimes) different pan laws, different code to make the sum of the sounds as well.
never felt the extra "warmness" of Ableton myself... isn't that (no offense) a very subjective opinion? has anyone conducted any (worthy of the name) tests to state such a thing?
important thing is: you must find a workflow you feel confortable with! I feel that Ableton makes you think a certain way, much more intuitive for some stuff to! whilst cubase, logic, pro tools, sonar, reaper; that kind of daw, has a different approach, how you translate your ideas is different. ableton wins for intuitive jamming, while the others go deeper in editting and have proper mixers and routing and this and that... at the end of the day, what you feel confortable working with is what matters, daws differ, but not so much in sound quality - even though I've heard more people claim wierd stuff about Ableton's low end, not the first time. if anyone else can share some info on that subbject, please let me know. |
|
|
|
Agorit
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
114
Posted : Sep 23, 2013 07:47
|
http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=1184416
quote
They all sound the same.
In sane, sensible, real-world practice there is no measurable difference between them. If you rig a test specifically to wring out the differences between how tiny decimals are rounded or truncated then you might be able to get a miniscule detectible (but not audible) difference between say 32-bit fixed-point results and 64-bit floating point. You can check out Lynn Fuston's Awesome DAWsum CD to compare a bunch of different analog and digital summing, but I can save you the trouble and tell you that among the digital summing busses, there is no difference.
So... what's with all the people who swear that DAW X sounds better than Y? Some of this is plain old "placebo effect," and some of it is user error, and some of it is a third thing I'll get to in a sec. There are several "hidden" ways in which users can very easily and unknowingly make invalid comparisons of what they *think* should be a simple A/B test. One is having dither, or a different type of dither enabled or disabled on one DAW but not the other-- this can give one DAW smoother-sounding tails and greater low-level detail, or another a slightly "veiled" sound with less sense of audio "black space" between notes-- exactly the kind of slight, ephemeral "lower quality" that people often refer to with one vs another. Another far more dramatic, but also easy-to-misunderstand difference is pan law. If you move the exact same project files from one DAW to another, and one of them has a different default pan law, then the difference in size, loudness, apparent detail, stereo spread, and instrument clarity could be pretty dramatic, although still within the realm of stuff that could be mis-heard as "better quality." These kinds of mistakes are easy to make if you don't really know what you're doing.
The one area where there *might* be a real difference is plugin handling. Theoretically all this stuff has specs that the plugin developers and the DAW developers should be following, but most of us are aware that not all plugins get on equally with all hosts. This is technically a *bug* and not a difference in the audio engine, but it's there.
For the record, it is pretty easy to perform a null test (as long as you know exactly what you're doing) to compare DAWs, and they all null completely when used sensibly. If you really push the limits and try to force a project to reveal differences, then you might get microscopic variations down at like -132dB from a 32-bit fixed engine vs a 64-bit float engine, but nothing that is going to be audible in a real double-blind listening test. It's also worth mentioning that fixed-point engines are susceptible to intersample distortion if you were to run all your levels right up to 0dB, but again, in sensible real-world practice it's not going to make any difference, and cakewalk users have nothing to fear since they have 64-bit float, which is the best you can get anyway.
Digital audio engines are just performing mathematical operations, like a calculator. If you plug in 4+4 on your calculator and I plug in 4+4 on mine they should both always spit out 8, unless one is outright broken. The microscopic differences between fixed point and floating-point and 64-bit vs 32-bit are basically like calculators that have 80 decimal places instead of 60, or that chop off the decimals that won't fit vs rounding them. So for instance if you divide 2/3 in one, it might spit out 0.66666666666666666666666666667, and the other might spit out 0.666666666666666666666666666. Those are generally not meaningful audible differences, and they are certainly not the kind of across-the-board "better quality" that is implied in many debates.
These kinds of things come up often on internet message boards, and lots and lots of theories from the brilliant to the preposterous get tossed around, and lots of flames and accusations and ill-will often gets expended before anyone actually goes to the small trouble of posting a reproducable null test, and then it invariably turns out that they are the same.
Cheers.
quote |
|
|
|
loki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
49
Posts :
429
Posted : Sep 23, 2013 12:30
|
I seriously doubt the credibility of anyone who thinks that DAWs sound inherently different from one another.
It suggests they have a serious lack of understanding of computer audio technology and what's actually going on behind the screen.
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your living room. ~Kurt Vonnegut
www.soundcloud.com/mixyott |
|
|
|
loki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
49
Posts :
429
Posted : Sep 23, 2013 12:34
|
Quote:
|
On 2013-09-22 00:48, Agorit wrote:
I dont know why, but i seen more often old producers consider move to ableton. I saw a interview of captain hook today and he said it. He produces in cubase but thinking change to live.
|
|
I see why a lot of producers are doing this. Most who do live sets, use Ableton for their live sets anyways. Less switching between DAWs, and you get a more complete understanding of the one that matters in a performance setting.
I really like Logic's power, workflow, and native plugins, but I've been switching moving to Live for years. It's only a matter of time.
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your living room. ~Kurt Vonnegut
www.soundcloud.com/mixyott |
|
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : Sep 23, 2013 13:24
|
ableton might make you concentrate more or composition while cubase on production quality cause of their workflows
to me albeton always felt like a great soft to jam ,have fun making music..i m not obessed by production when using it that is good or bad thing depending the work.
writing in ableton mixing in cubase would suit me maybe but it s too much hassle.
cubase 7 look like amazing soft btw ! if it s stable and not too buggy
ableton is a cpu hog that might be a problem..and probably full of nasty bugs too  |
|
|
|
TimeTraveller
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
80
Posts :
3207
Posted : Sep 23, 2013 13:34
|
Quote:
|
On 2013-09-22 14:35, Kolishin Methud wrote:
in the quality department of both, i say they are 98% the same... there IS a audible difference, although very slight and sometimes not even audible.
Live tends to have a "warmer" sound. so it can easily muddy up your subs and bass's if not careful.
Cubase from what i hear to my ears. doesn't have that warmth, theirfor its still alot more accurate audio wise while mixing, simply because you are hearing what you are really generating. there won't be any warmth unless you add warmth to it.
ableton had a funky way of doing that, like i said its slight and if you work in styles of sound it will be quite audible (low mids and bass mostly) but that's litterially the ONLY thing i heard different. The reason I was told live processes audio this way is because since it was originally made as "live performance" software the output is already set up to sound warm and silky... weather its true or not i haven't a clue haha but its a interesting theory, i could believe it too!
i wouldn't let that 1-2% of difference in sound effect anything though, seriously now days live is so integrated with some of the best tools around if you know how to mix it won't really make a difference at all.
Mind you also alot of the "sound" difference people think they hear from live also has to do with the warping being engaged, so it sounds bad if the warp is left on and the markers are all over the place!! that and the simple fact that when you render/bounce/export your final audio live has some dither options set up by default. personally i always render in WAV without any dither. just because it sometimes can add to that warm silky sound. So most of the time that makes up for the reason of that sound. But even when thats off it will still retain that slightly warmer sound! very VERY slight but its there to my ears
|
|
exactly. Same expiriences, very cool written. The difference is pretty huge though imo - soundwise- dunno if just 1-2%.
https://soundcloud.com/shivagarden |
|
|
|
ierofante
Started Topics :
6
Posts :
253
Posted : Sep 23, 2013 14:53
|
Quote:
|
On 2013-09-23 12:30, loki wrote:
I seriously doubt the credibility of anyone who thinks that DAWs sound inherently different from one another.
It suggests they have a serious lack of understanding of computer audio technology and what's actually going on behind the screen.
|
|
I had this same exact conclusion. However later in my life I changed my mind.
I'm not here to force everyone into my thinking. BTW
Fire Walk With Me |
|
|
|
Agorit
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
114
Posted : Sep 23, 2013 21:40
|
ah its does't matter, we need to just continue what is more confortable for us, and make better music
ANd i really like to interconnect the daws with each others. when i learn new tecniq in some daw, i try to apply the same in other daw.
For ex, in ableton, u can create stereo spread with warp modes, now im tryin to do it in cubase for the same principle. |
|
|
|
|
