| Author
|
FL Producer 5 Cubase SX 2 comparison.
|
Trip-
IsraTrance Team
Started Topics :
101
Posts :
3239
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 08:09
|
what's the final conclusion? FLstudio loads 24bit files and leaves them 24bit or truncates them to 16?
  Crackling universes dive into their own neverending crackle...
AgalactiA |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 12:19
|
Quote:
| To get advice from tobacco companys how to test cigarettes for cancer? Nice idea, we will use it. |
|
Well, thats exactly what you have been doing.
I hope that when the test is published it clearly says it has been done in close cooperation with image line.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 13:28
|
Trip, Image Line clearly says, FL Producer can load 24bit files, since their sequencer is not 24bit internal processing files are dithered to 16bit and harm original sample.
Spindrift, i don't get what do you want then please leave this thread alone, noone get's your point here. |
|
|
|
Cane
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
47
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 13:57
|
Board link has changed, in order to be registered to avoid forgeiners you need to register and wait until admin promote you to moderator rank,
http://fatherkike.proboards43.com/
thanks Cane |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 14:05
|
Well, I like to find out the point of this test, but since noone want to answer my questions clearly I keep posting until I got a reply.
1. What is the purpose of the test?
2. What is the point of making a 16 bit test?
If the test is done in a way influenced by image lines employees that should be clearly stated to make shure you do not fool anyone thinking you are making a unbiased test.
There is no way to find out from image lines documents that it does not use 24 bit files.
Logic doesn't work in 24 bit internally and it does not have to dither down to 16 bit.
If it says that it can load 24 bit the files should be used as 24 bit, otherwise in practice it cannot.
And I think thockin should apologise for calling whoever he was refering to morons and admit it's stupid to claim that anyone that can hear a difference in the sound of fruity suck at producing.
He just proven that there IS a difference and still he come with bovine manure comments like that.
Thats really what pisses me off.
I think you know that I do like to help and dislike elitism, but I also strongly dislike disinformation and when people spread BS without any basis.
So, unfortunally I will not be intimitated by you telling me to leave this thread alone.
The only way to do that is by explaining better what you are doing, stop calling names and assuring me that you are capable of making a realistic and unbiased test.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
Cane
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
47
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 14:23
|
|
open ICQ |
|
|
|
orange
Fat Data
Started Topics :
154
Posts :
3918
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 16:16
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-26 18:20, H2O wrote:
Orange
I tried not to respond for silly remarks, but as Thockin said "morons should not enter this thread at all".
|
|
thanks man im realy feeling bad now...
but yes !! you can do what you do i will stick on making some tunes cos even iff you find whats the best or watts the reason that fruity is making more noise than others its still the same maybe it will change something in your point of view but for most of the people its still the same we use what we know in order to make music..!!!
just for the topic !!
i am a fruity user the most but yes cubase and logic audio engine is better more clear and smooth sound is coming out but the workflow is much slower and in some cases you know that some ideas most be put fast down or they gone so i make all in most in fruity and mix in cubase just to solve all the issues
never put dither in the export prosses in fl less noise is achieved and never trust fl db metering is not accurate and use 32 bit to achieve the best from your soft synth
mix and master in cubase or what ever seq
finnaly leave a 4db headroom at least when export in fl
happy new year
orange
http://www.landmark-recordings.com/
http://soundcloud.com/kymamusic |
|
|
|
Cane
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
47
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 16:44
|
Orange we wanted to keep this thread out of remarks like emotions, i think you and Spindrift didn't quite understand it. Now seems you got the point of the thread, hopefully Spindrift will also.
We want to find why is FLS making noise and how to avoid it, so it somehow will help you.
I think you should re read thread because written there FLS damages the sound once it loads, so mixing in Cubase or Logic will not solve anything. |
|
|
|
Trip-
IsraTrance Team
Started Topics :
101
Posts :
3239
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 16:49
|
spindrift...
where from did you get the idea of 'biased test' ? I don't understand what drove you to that conclusion.
I don't see any elitism involved, just a few people who are trying to 'stop' this test from happening... or trying to convince everyone of something by just saying it - instead of trying to help.
Crackling universes dive into their own neverending crackle...
AgalactiA |
|
|
|
Cane
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
47
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 16:50
|
|
Spindrift, i realy hate to say it but this thread about FLS and Cubase sx comparison. We find FLS output different from Cubase's so we investigate why. I don't understand you at all. Seems you don't use any of these softwares or wish to test with us. So why bother to answer here at all. Stop making your artist EGO confident. |
|
|
|
Cane
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
47
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 16:59
|
|
Orange one more thing, some claim that FLS sound different or amateur. We find out why it sound amateur. If you will write an email to Image Line with statement "why FLS sound different than other hosts?" you will not get a proper answer. When we write an email to Image Line based on tests which are objective, non emotional facts this can make Image Line think twise before releasing 6.xx version since now they know some of FLS users can damage their sells using amateur so called "on load dithering" against them. If it doesn't matter to you, you more than welcome to leave this thread alone. |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 17:45
|
@Trip
The test is no doubt biased when you during the course of the test is in contact with the developers of one of the software you should test during the course of the test and getting advice from them on how to carry out the test.
That should be done after the tests was complete to keep it unbiased.
I have no feeling to cooperate with the bunch involved with this test considering their attitude.
That does not mean I do not help people.
This test is not helpful at all from what I can gather so I leave it to the ignorant and rude bunch being in charge.
But I will still state my opinion about it if I feel like.
Now the purpose of this test vary depending on who you listen to and even in different statements from the same individuals.
Quote:
|
We want to find why is FLS making noise and how to avoid it,
We want to find why and what FL Producer do to output signal compared to other sequencers.
I want this to be *the* test people point to when someone claims X is better than Y.
We like to make comparison chart of all sequencers.
PURPOSE OF TEST WAS TO CHECK OUTPUT OF SEQUENCERS
this thread about FLS and Cubase sx comparison.
|
|
Let me explain my objections to the various definitions.
To find out WHY and how to solve the problem with fruitys "sound engine" seems like a silly target for the test.
For producers it's not interesting WHY a software does not sound as it should.
Ok, if you think you can fix the problem it could be interesting, but I think you are being very unrealistic if you think you can do that.
But I really hope I'm wrong about that and you do find a solution.
If you want it to be a test to point people to when discussing if X is better than Y it's not point checking the mixing on unity gain, without panning, FX or using truncated or dithered 16 bit files.
No one cares about if the software can be used with good results if you use it that way.
People do touch their faders, use FX and panning and load 24 bit files if the software pretends to support them.
The reason why it should be tested first by mixing some tracks at unity gain is that some people was convinced that it SHOULD not sound different when doing that it seems.
That notion was obviously false to start with and based on loose theoretical bullskit.
Ok, now you proven that it was utter crap, so come on move on and make a test on how the differences is percived when using the software in a realistic way.
To test the output of sequencers is a vague definition.
It seems to me that means for you if it's POSSIBLE to get a identical output rather that trying to establish how different the output sounds when using the software in a realistic way.
And if this is about cubase and fruity comparision how come I was asked in this thread to help out with testing on other brands?
My advice is keep cool and let there be some discussion before you embark on performing the tests if you don't want critics.
Now you have already started the test.
You have allowed individuals make it questionable by communicating with ONE of the developers to get advice on how to perform the test and on top of it all does not seem to have a concensus about what the test should be designed to do.
Take a bit of conflict without calling names or trying to silence critics and try to reach some kind of concensus from the people you want involved in the test before carrying them out.
Since you did not give the time for a discussion to take place you are left with a pile of S**T IMO.
I wont reply to your crap about ego and silly morons.
I'm not giving answers here, I'm asking some questions.
What if someone tried to give proper answers just a lot of below the belt personal attacks?
Really guy's, leave the testing to someone with manners and a more though out approach to the process. Your ignorance, unpoliteness and inconclusiveness makes you incapable in handling this kind of project.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 18:24
|
spindrift,
i explained your questions 2 times in this thread and you STILL keep on asking them.
please refer to my awnsers why 16 bit is ok to use.
if you dont understand this or have comments on those thoughts then please tell me what you dont understand or think is wrong.
you just keep skipping back saying the same thing over and over again despite the fact that ppl try explaining it to you.
you are not being critical .
why? because you dont seem to notice the explanations that would render your socalled critisism invalid.
that's not critisism, thats shortsightedness.
i will now, for the third time, explain why it does not matter wether you use 24 bit files or 16 bit files to start with.
fruity does some phase stuff to the signal and this will show up equally strong on 16 bit files and 24 bit files.
phase is time related, not bitdepth related.
now, if you want ANY kind of discussion then please dont revert back to your question but just tell me if you understand this and/or you agree with it and why (in case you dont).
"Since you did not give the time for a discussion to take place you are left with a pile of S**T IMO. "
well, seems to me most of this S**T comes from you.
"I'm not giving answers here, I'm asking some questions. "
and by failing to read the awnsers you keep asking the same thing over and over and over.
"What if someone tried to give proper answers just a lot of below the belt personal attacks? "
i did that at least 2 times and you didnt notice.,
wtf?
"Really guy's, leave the testing to someone with manners and a more though out approach to the process."
i asked you how we should conduct the tests acording to you.
your awnser was vague to say the least.
now, how can you even START to have an opinion about the quality of the test if you yourself are incapable of defining a proper test?
we are looking for OBJECTIVE awnsers, not SUBJECTIVE listening tests.
so, do you have an alternative test to OBJECTIVELY decide what an audio mixing engine does to the sound?
|
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 18:45
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-27 17:45, Spindrift wrote:
Now the purpose of this test vary depending on who you listen to and even in different statements from the same individuals.
Quote:
|
We want to find why is FLS making noise and how to avoid it,
We want to find why and what FL Producer do to output signal compared to other sequencers.
I want this to be *the* test people point to when someone claims X is better than Y.
We like to make comparison chart of all sequencers.
PURPOSE OF TEST WAS TO CHECK OUTPUT OF SEQUENCERS
this thread about FLS and Cubase sx comparison.
|
|
Let me explain my objections to the various definitions.
|
|
It is exactly the same thing, we test all outputs of all sequencers we able to, find FL Producer as problematic and test it further in order to create comparison chart.
You still fail to see your fault? |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 19:20
|
@ZilDoggo
You did explain why. but the reason did not make sense.
Quote:
| using 16 bits in this case will alow us to rule out bit depth from the test by making it equal for all sequencers. |
|
Why do you like to make the test equal for all sequencers when they are not?
Nowhere I have been able to find anything suggesting that fruity claims to not use 24 bit files, so why would a user not load 24 bit in to it?
From what I can gather because thockin spoke to Image Line and they gave him information contradicting the fruity documentation and said that the results should be equal if using 16 bit.
I do not get the point in making it into a test finding out WHY it does not sound the same.
It's better left to the developers.
What I would expect a producer would like to know is if and how different it sounds.
Sure it's subjective....as always with audio equipment.
All manufacturers of audio equipment know that and have therefore developed methods of making proper listening tests.
Thats how you test audio hardware, and I don't know why it can not be applied to software as well.
Thinking that you can be objective about the output of a sequencer is suffering from hybris.
None of us totally understand the ins and out of all sequencers and do have to rely on our ears rather than technical "facts".
At least this test proven that some people fail to hear the differences because they was to caught up in theory.
The simple reason why I only outlined what I think should be included in a proper test is that most the people that wants to involve in the test seem to be more interested in proving theoretical point rather than make a serious attempt to find out the differences in output.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
