| Author
|
does anyone use synapse orion
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : May 7, 2004 13:22
|
there must be something wrong then.,
can you list the exact settings for all the levels in the chain?.
with a sample that is 0db i can only get a little below and a little above 0db ,., but never exactly on it.,
anyone, please! 
grts.,
aka., |
|
|
Te_nTe
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
29
Posts :
444
Posted : May 7, 2004 14:34
|
whooooh
there is nothing wrong with it - what going on with you - go and make some music instead of researching what good and what not on each host. |
|
|
|
EYB
Noized
Started Topics :
111
Posts :
2849
Posted : May 7, 2004 16:01
|
He can't, there are no facts, since the result counts. 
 Signature |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : May 7, 2004 19:29
|
das fung,
i know how to load samples into programs, no problem here.,
why are you so defensive?.,
you have to understand that i'm not trying to *judge* the quality, i'm only trying to measure stuff.,
i'm not trying to bash your favourite sequencer!!!
let me say it again
i'm not trying to bash your favourite sequencer!!!!!!
so i'm not saying that orion is no good or that logic is better.,
what i'm trying to do is measure why some sequencers sound different from others.,
but to do a completely objective measurement you need to have some kind of reference point.,., and the problem with fruity is that i'm unable to find such a point.,
so i cannot make an objective measurement of the quality of the output of fruityloops., that's all., it doesnt make fruity a bad program.,., it's only impossible to be totaly objective about the quality of the outputs.,
and with quality i mean how much the signal is degrading by processing ( every digital process degrades the signal a bit ).,
cubase and logic are more professional because they have a more professional toolset ..., they integrate better into big studio's compared to cheaper products.,
but it doesnt mean that you can not get a pro sound out of another sequencer.,
so stop putting words in my mouth, ok?.,
eyb,
results count, i agree,
but that doesnt mean there are no facts!
greets,
aka,. |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : May 7, 2004 19:32
|
te_nte,
i didnt say there is something wrong with fruity,
i mean there is something wrong with my level settings.,
aka., |
|
|
|
Te_nTe
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
29
Posts :
444
Posted : May 7, 2004 20:53
|
zildoggo try recording in soundforge and level it to 0 db and then take it to cubase - and tell me what the result you get...
i am waiting |
|
|
|
ocelot
ocelot
Started Topics :
94
Posts :
783
Posted : May 7, 2004 22:16
|
well ok then man. hook up your goniometer,
hook up your spectral analyzer, check the amplitudes too while you are at it.
you can't check for phase differences b/t sounds mixed internally- i doubt mixing algorithms do much in the phase domain- they are more of amplitude summing and scaling sorts of things eh? i seriously doubt that there is the slightest bit of variation in the timing of internal 'midi' (virtual) and audio playback in ANY computer based sequencer. variation usually happens in the midi interface (software or hardware) or in two CPU's with diff clock speeds... so this whole discussion about minor variations in playback timing and phase variations in the mixing algorithms must stop please- its bullshit.
my point is the same as your final point
pick your host based on how you like using it and its featureset, not on some bullshit idea about sound quality- even reason (yuk) can have excellent sound quality if used properly.
its not a peice of software that is 'professional' or not, its an audio engineer.
chances are your host software is just fine and has no built in limiter etc...if it does, just back off the levels a bit- we all do better with turning things down- thats what your bitdepth is for- its not like our music has dynamic range or anything- 90% of trance exists within 5db of 0...
you can always boost it and process its dynamics later...
make music, be creative. some of the best music currently made is made with fruity loops- listen to the Gil/Ariane cd The Nommos Digitaria on Avatar records for an example of fruity loops production done well... so its not the software that determines the sound quality so much as the techniques used...
|
|
|
|
ocelot
ocelot
Started Topics :
94
Posts :
783
Posted : May 7, 2004 22:27
|
and logic seemed illogical to me
whereas it seems bang obvious to some friends of mine so there you go....
i couldn't understand the interface to fruity if you PAID me, while Orion just made perfect sense to me...
and let me tell you that some of the so called pro gear
sucks
for example- MADI- what the fuck is this interface?
56 channels I/O with MUX/DEMUX
and there is STILL
about 30ms latency just IN the MADI interface?!?!?!
you have to monitor off the board rather than through the recording loop.
sad huh?
whereas- steinberg licenced ASIO drivers work so well that everyone uses them for their hardware and has become almost synonymous with 'low latency'
lets not forget that Logic and Cubase came up as underdogs in a 'Pro' audio world and that they aren't really 'Pro' either and all the real cool stuff is happening at the 'semi-pro' level
thats my understanding of it... |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : May 8, 2004 19:23
|
ocelot,
"i doubt mixing algorithms do much in the phase domain- they are more of amplitude summing and scaling sorts of things eh?"
yeah, i doubt it too but i know of some limiter-ish algorithms that simply try to rearange some hi frequency contents to increase dynamic range.., so that's why i mentioned it.,
anyway, it was just to illustrate that looking only at the frequency spectrum will not show the whole picture,
ooh, and i never mentioned midi timing i think?.,
"its not a peice of software that is 'professional' or not, its an audio engineer."
true, but software can help a lot.,
like the fact that you can run tdm plugs in logic if you go through pro-tools hardware.,., for me that's a pro option.,
actually, what makes it pro to me is that you can bend the sequencer for the task you want to do., you can have different setups of the tool to match the process you want to do at the time., so that meant a lot of keyboard shortcuts and stuff and little handy timesavers .,
flexible audio routings is also something which i think is important.,
a good set of arrange tools is also pro to me.,
"even reason (yuk) can have excellent sound quality if used properly. "
yeah, but you'll have to work twice as hard to get that quality out of it, is my experience.,.,
backin off levels was not a real option for me since i was working in 16 bits untill recently., so i needed that headroom to get my bits tickled.,
but with all the lo-fi pop being made these days i understand how some ppl can love reason.,
"and logic seemed illogical to me"
don't worry, this happens to a lot of ppl
i agree that in the pro seqment there is also a lot of bullshit.,
"lets not forget that Logic and Cubase came up as underdogs in a 'Pro' audio world and that they aren't really 'Pro' either and all the real cool stuff is happening at the 'semi-pro' level"
yeah., both underdogs i agree, tho i feel logic is more accepted in the world of the big studio's., cubase a bit less but still growing strongly., (not counting in asio, which already dominates a much bigger segment)
and being accepted in the 'pro' world is important because it means that other 'pro' manufacturers will start seing it as a standard and start interfacing better with the technology.,
anyway., nuf said., this toppic is getting boring
grts.,
aka., |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : May 8, 2004 19:24
|
das fung,
"Zildoggo don't be prophet be killa fullon artist !"
i make progressive not full on.,
does that make me a proghet ?.,
grts,
aka., |
|
|
|
ocelot
ocelot
Started Topics :
94
Posts :
783
Posted : May 11, 2004 12:11
|
i think we can all take this lovely excursion into technical dweeborama as a nice reminder to make nice sounds in whatever program we use.
let us all remember to please give the virus presets a little break and take the time to make more interesting sounds.
let us remember to actually record some of our own samples now and again.
let us all get a little more original and take this music somewhere so its not just us wankers wanking.
and somehow i knew you made progressive based on your posts Zildoggo. that makes you a prophet 5
hahahaha
i do think the 'pro' audio bit is a blur. with hardware its clear- balanced i/o and your good to go. or something like that. with software its all up in the air.
i can guarantee you that orion is pulling no tricks like the high freq one you mention.
to be completely honest i'd have to say that what most people call the 'sound' of a program consists of inserting a built-in synth module, calling up a preset, and playing it. very few people seem to take the time to make their own patches from scratch.
its really easy to do if you can learn basic subtractive synthesis. you can make a wicked midi-synched-lfo-modulated-pitch "dewew" or whatever in no time...never judge a synth by the presets...
so my big question to you Zildoggo is this:
are you developing audio software?
if not, you ought to- the industry needs people like you.
if so, where can i try it? |
|
|
|
ocelot
ocelot
Started Topics :
94
Posts :
783
Posted : May 12, 2004 13:07
|
oh-
btw- here's an example of a good pro audio mixing algorithm.
add the samples (amplitude) and divide by # of trax:)
if you put a soft sat or some other kind of rounding thingy on the mix you should be able to disengage it and get hard clipping
(or not, if the levels are below 0db)
any eq or effects would be prior to or in parallel with the track fader.
there really are some standardized gain stages these days in software suites.
the real realm where different math and programming techniques come into play (not the mixer and audio output path) is in terms of audio signal processing- whether as a plugin effect, or as part of the various components in the signal chain of a virtual synthesizer.
the way a filter section behaves, for instance, on a given plugin synth, can greatly affect the overall sound of the synth- much more than host program ever would.
when you process the various audio signals in your hosts mixer via either insert or send fx there is a wide range in the sort of treatment the little bits can expect in terms of precision (how many places calculations are carried to and what).
having the most ungainly bloated algorithms won't necessarily equal superior sound. the name of THIS game is clever design and optimization where it counts. you don't want your plugin to singlehandedly take 100% of cpu cycles. one of the built-in inconsistencies across computers is how they handle denormaled numbers. the occasional plugin will run afoul of a given processors microcode on handling denormaled numbers if this particular plugin uses denormalled numbers in its calculations...
i could go on and on but i'll shut up now thank you. |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : May 13, 2004 00:27
|
"so my big question to you Zildoggo is this:
are you developing audio software? "
actually,
i started developing a sofsynth recently.,
it's still in a very early stage but it's progressing nicely.,
btw.,
i did a good test with reason and it realy realy plays around with phase., the difference between original and reason output spans the whole dynamics range (!!) at certain points., realy strange., could be either phase f*&^#d up by mixer or the sampler is not providing the buffer with data on time.,.,
"btw- here's an example of a good pro audio mixing algorithm.
add the samples (amplitude) and divide by # of trax:) "
yeah, i expect this to happen (samples should be added, the division depends on the application of course)
it is actually what i test for .,., if you play back a bit of audio through a sequencer then the output at 0db should be exactly the same as the original .,
i test for this by substracting the original from the ouput of the sequencer.,
if the mixing algorithm is good then the result should be empty., anything different from zero means that there was some sort of calculation 'error'.
i've tested logic, fuity and reason at the time.,
sorry guys, but of the three logic was the only one that did a sample precice mix of 4 audio tracks.,
fruity had a resulting difference at around -30db i think., and reason had differences all over the place.,
so here you go, .,
still not saying one is better from the other.,
but there is definitely a difference between the three.,
so this topic is not as simple as just adding samples,.,
anyway,., .,
"i could go on and on but i'll shut up now thank you."
yeah, since i already know all the stuff you're saying (joking) , .,
very much agreeing with you tho!.,
denormalisation sux,
greets.,
aka.,
|
|
|
|
|
