| Author
|
FL Producer 5 Cubase SX 2 comparison.
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 01:19
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-25 16:53, Spindrift wrote:
Who works with 16 bit and why?
|
|
that is not the issue.
point is that any big errors will show up no matter wether you use 16 bits or 24 bit files.
there is no reason NOT to use it.
again, this test is not about bit depth.,
Quote:
|
I would say pretty much any computer less that some three years old can handle 24 bit without a problem.
|
|
that, again, is not the point.
Quote:
|
I really don't see anything to be gained from using 16 bit in practice and for definatly not in a test evaluating the sound engine of a sequencer from the perspective of a producer.
|
|
using 16 bits in this case will alow us to rule out bit depth from the test by making it equal for all sequencers.
Quote:
|
But for me like I said it's completly uninteresting if I can use a mixer with all faders on 0Db. I do not really care if the summing is the reason some software sounds very different from other. I suppose it's not.
|
|
the 0db thing is only to have a reference. you cannot do a test without a proper reference.
it gives you a reference for all the math that is going on.
again, not interesting for making music but essential for doing TESTS.
Quote:
|
But I'm not a developer of audio software and just would be interested in getting some comparasions of how they sound in use.
|
|
use them! 
Quote:
|
For sure you could formulate a test doing more than just summing.
|
|
yes, you propably can.
but that's not what we are doing right now.
pay attention.
Quote:
|
But I guess the people that can use their ears is less interested and people who feel they have a theoretical point to prove do the test and in a way to prove their point.
|
|
ears are not objective.
but i agree that objective listening should be part of any quality assessment,.
well, i dont think we would be here testing if this had not been done before.
people hear differences, but we know ears are not objective.
so we try to find an objective way to see if the subjective ears are correct.
Quote:
|
I will not use my sequencer to mix a few 16bit audio tracks at unity gain, so for me the test is not remotly interesting.
|
|
that's not true.
if there is something strange going on in the mixing then it will also apply to 24 bit files so it does not matter if the test is done in 16 bits.
and unity gain is just important t the testing method.
if there are problems in unity gain then there will be problems at any level.
honestly, i just think that you do not understand why this test is being done the way it is being done.,
i tried to explain it to you but you keep coming back with useless arguments.
you need to realy UNDERSTAND that so make a good test you need reference and clarity ,.
if this is of no interest to you then why bother to awnser??
go read some other thread or something,.
greetos.,
aka,. |
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 01:22
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-25 23:52, H2O wrote:
We have checked same test on Sonar, Logic and Cubase. Their output signal was clean of addition. We should check Reason as well. Any Reason users wish to help?
|
|
i dont feel like doing your test right now, sorry
but i have done the same thing half a year ago or so.,
and reason was a very interesting case.,
i mixed up 4 wavs and then subtracted it from a master sum file.,
the results were shocking.
i had a rest signal all the way up to -30 (!!!) db..,
so this one is fun to do,.
greetos.,
aka |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 01:29
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-25 23:44, Boobytrip wrote:
Why not do a statistical test ? Make a few mixes of the same audio-files (many channels) in multiple sequencers. Be sure to check the mixes a few days later and make sure they're (about) the same. Put them on your site and let all the experts here decide which mix was made with which sequencer and which one they think is the best. If the experts can't tell the difference, who cares ?
|
|
this is actually a pretty good test.,
maybe it should be the the next thing?
make it a double blind test and see if the ppl can match sound to sequencer.
but unfrtunately my statistical knowledge is so basic that i dont know how to interpret the results properly.,
anyone?
greetos.,
aka |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 01:37
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-25 21:14, BAPHOMET_ENGINE wrote:
Yep this is math, to be more exact its Nyquist Theorem  !!
|
|
nyquist theorem sux!
no, i realy think it does.,
but that's another story
basically the theorem does not cover every phenomenon i can hear.
greetos.,
aka.,
|
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 01:37
|
|
Boobytrip, i can assure you that FL Producer will sound different at 30 channels mix than other hosts already mentioned here(i can send you all files of my test to listen your own, sorry no web space to upload). It is different, the noise FL Producer adds to each of channels is only at 90dB but summing whole mix will give you totally different sound. High end will miss in Fruity as mix would sound muddy. I can assume that Cubase, Logic and Sonar will not have such difference since their 12 samples sequences were identical. |
|
|
|
EYB
Noized
Started Topics :
111
Posts :
2849
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 02:15
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-26 01:37, H2O wrote:
Boobytrip, i can assure you that FL Producer will sound different at 30 channels mix than other hosts already mentioned here(i can send you all files of my test to listen your own, sorry no web space to upload). It is different, the noise FL Producer adds to each of channels is only at 90dB but summing whole mix will give you totally different sound. High end will miss in Fruity as mix would sound muddy. I can assume that Cubase, Logic and Sonar will not have such difference since their 12 samples sequences were identical.
|
|
One question: U r talking about the sound rendered or the sound not rendered/inside FL?
 Signature |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 03:03
|
EYB, so called sound harm probably accur at loading nor rendering or maybe both. Yes i'm talking about final result, after rendering. If me is right and sound distorted while loading into the FL's sampler so rewire, VSTi host or external render (live signal recording) can't solve the distortion.
As soon as guys here will have time we all will check this theory also, i mean FL's sampler. |
|
|
|
BAPHOMET_ENGINE
Baphomet Engine
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
295
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 04:26
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-26 03:03, H2O wrote:
EYB, so called sound harm probably accur at loading nor rendering or maybe both. Yes i'm talking about final result, after rendering. If me is right and sound distorted while loading into the FL's sampler so rewire, VSTi host or external render (live signal recording) can't solve the distortion.
As soon as guys here will have time we all will check this theory also, i mean FL's sampler.
|
|
Just little question, I know that you already tested and compared the final render of FL, Sonar, Logic and Cubase... so when you use the FL Studio on Rewire as VSTi in Cubase do you found any rendering difference from when use FL as Host ?
...and my friend DarkPsy, FL Studio its a professional tool for sure man.. doens't matter the price, you can check that many producers (not only trance) uses it and these users got good quality, but they always use FL as Sequencer not for the final master process.... but sometimes you can do more things using other sequencers and this ins't the point here.
-------
Manic Dragon Records
http://www.myspace.com/baphometengine
2to6 Records |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 14:44
|
I'm sorry for jumping to conclusions.
I did not know this was a forum full of audio software developers.
I thought we was mostly producers here.
And why you bother to discuss it in a forum like this. There is forums for audio software developers that surely would be more suitable.
Would a producer would be interested in WHY fruity sounds inferior and how to fix it?
Producers do not want to work in 16bit, and there is no reason to encourage that practice.
If it is a test for producers by producers you would test the software in a way as to see what results they can expect when using it the way they should.
Whatever, I'll leave you aspiring DSP coders to try to find out where exactly the problem is with fruity and how to find the lowest common denominator so you get a test where you manage to get identical results.
But it definatly won't be the test that like thockin said "I want this to be *the* test people point to when someone claims X is better than Y", because it does not show at all which sequencer is most accurate by testing it with truncated 16 bit audio because no producer concerned with accuracy uses truncated 16 bit. Testing with 24 bit has already on the other hand showed that fruity is inferior in it's sound engine.
But I really don't see what interest any producer would have in knowing the results of the 16 bit test.
Maybe you can enlighten me on what the actual point is because I still can't see one from a producers perspective.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 14:51
|
Spindrift, do not talk about all producers since you are only one person. These who intrested in FL Producer un accuracy probably FL Producer users, musicians like you. You trying to brake a wall, when there is no wall at all. Monty Python: The Holy Grail fits in your case as well.
I think it is much more intresting than thread about " how to make that sound?" or "what delay are you using?"
Something fresh and intresting. |
|
|
|
slyman604
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
263
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 15:01
|
what is so hard to understand about this test.
Its not does fruity suck as a tool, if you think so listen to bluetech's newest album, all fruity and kills any release ive heard this year. Its not 24bit vs 16 bit, not the point. This should be a good test to ask the fruity devs "what is going on here?", thats it, anything else is subjective.
I dont see the point in doing it with reason, its obvious just useing your ears the audio path isnt clean. |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 15:05
|
|
No one is saying FL Producer is not sequencer, it is just not for ppl who care about quality of mix. Until we find out why it generates noise. |
|
|
|
orik
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
45
Posts :
317
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 15:32
|
well as an ez fruity user, you could
notice the differance, the most in the
higher freq's espscialy on hihats,
i used the same hihat samples, on fruity and
nuendo, and it sounds different,
im not sure though its because of the bussing, in fruity (wich it might be...)
but i remember in older versions they had,
(at least it sounded like it) some sort
of compression, and a slight reverbaration,
on the L R output. they might of still
inserted something on the output buss,
that gives it its caracteristic of its sound... |
|
|
|
Trip-
IsraTrance Team
Started Topics :
101
Posts :
3239
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 16:01
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-26 15:01, slyman604 wrote:
Its not does fruity suck as a tool, if you think so listen to bluetech's newest album, all fruity and kills any release ive heard this year. |
|
For sure a great release from a great artist... but I am sure he used Cubase as he wrote on his website.
and now to the point,
I think that whoever doesn't like this test.. or doesn't like the idea... or whatever - it's easier for you NOT to reply -and easier for us.
Crackling universes dive into their own neverending crackle...
AgalactiA |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 16:33
|
Sure it would be easier for you to ignore critics.
Feel free to skip over my posts if they bother you.
All I'm wondering is what is the point of the test?
I don't know if there is any concensus on that, and in that case what is it?
No one have formulated a definate purpose in this thread anyway, and it seems to me it's changing during the course of the tests.
Again, to find out WHY it generates noise would surely be mostly of interest for developers.
For a producer it's enough to know that it DOES generate noise.
I keep discussing this because I think the test could be interesting and helpful, but as it's carried out now it's not. Thats a shame, but yes...I'll leave you to it and quit winching.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
