| Author
|
FL Producer 5 Cubase SX 2 comparison.
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 00:44
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-23 22:29, thockin wrote:
Third, converting the input to 16 bits can cause up to 1 LSB of distortion. That means that there might be some dither-like noise between -96 and -90 dB when you compare to teh original.
|
|
This could explain the test results we got. We have 12 stereo tracks in the test. 24 mono tracks in other words. 24 times a nit of noise adds up ... But this doesn't quite explain the DC offset.
Quote:
|
In order to make the tests more accurate, I propose that we convert all the source tracks to 16 bits.
|
|
Ok but this has to be done centraly so that everyone is comparing the same 16 bit files. I'll convert all the files and upload them to you.
UnderTow |
|
|
thockin
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
114
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 00:57
|
If you want, I'll convert them and re-upload tonight. No stress - I have a fast link 
|
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 01:02
|
Ok...explain one thing to me:
What I always understood it's not advisable to neither truncate the higher resolution to 16 bit or dither on many channels (especially with noise shaping but also without).
It should be done only once when mastering.
All engineers that know digital well seem to agree on that.
So how does fruity solve that dilemma.
And why make all this testing using a method of recording/mixing that is generally looked upon as inferior and flawed?
Like I said my 800Mhz laptop with an internal 2.5" hadles 24 bit without problem so what is the point of using 16 bit?
 (``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 01:05
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-24 00:57, thockin wrote:
If you want, I'll convert them and re-upload tonight. No stress - I have a fast link
|
|
Too late I'm uploading. I converted all the files to 16bit using PWR-3 dithering.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 01:11
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-24 01:02, Spindrift wrote:
Ok...explain one thing to me:
What I always understood it's not advisable to neither truncate the higher resolution to 16 bit or dither on many channels (especially with noise shaping but also without).
It should be done only once when mastering.
All engineers that know digital well seem to agree on that.
So how does fruity solve that dilemma.
|
|
I don't really think it does solve this problem. Basicly we are now giving FL the benefit of the doubt. In theory we should just be doing all the tests at 24 bit. Unfortunately, due to FL's limitations we are also going to do the tests at 16 bit. This should be clearly explained in the final page.
Tim said he wants this to be THE definitive test on the subject that everyone will point to. I entirely agree with him. So for the sake of thoroughness we are testing both options to be able to include FL in the tests.
This means more work but I really think this is worth it. Half a test is a waste of time IMO. We have enough interested people participating and willing to help. So lets just do it!
UnderTow |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 01:21
|
Count me and Cane there, maybe some other guys will join (like EYB, Tsabeat and Spindrift for example).
Tim, i'm sorry for my words sound bit rude, it is not for you but for Image Line who claim things they shouldn't. I do think Image Line bullshiting us since test we done is the basic tests of audio software. I think problem is something else what Image Line can't solve due to their limitations. |
|
|
|
thockin
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
114
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 01:26
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-24 01:02, Spindrift wrote:
Ok...explain one thing to me:
What I always understood it's not advisable to neither truncate the higher resolution to 16 bit or dither on many channels
|
|
Truncating 24 bit to 16 bit means that the very quietest sounds get lost. That's why you dither. It's arguable whether we should dither all the tracks or just truncate them.
Either way, it doesn't matter for the purposes of the test.
Quote:
|
So how does fruity solve that dilemma.
|
|
It doesn't. You lose the very quietest sounds. It does not dither when converting to 16 bit, I believe. The reality is - you will not notice it unless you play really quiet sounds amped REALLY high. BUt it is sub-optimal, and Gol is planning to support higher bitrates properly.
Quote:
|
And why make all this testing using a method of recording/mixing that is generally looked upon as inferior and flawed?
|
|
It's flawed in theory. It doesn't impact the test though, because all the hosts will use teh same samples. The point of this test is not to see which host sounds BEST, it's to see which hosts are ACCURATE. If the results are ACCURATE, the input could be 3-bit whitenoise, and the test would still be valid.
Get it? We're testing the hypothesis that the result of a mix is the EXACT MATHEMATICAL SUM of the inputs and nothing more. |
|
|
|
BAPHOMET_ENGINE
Baphomet Engine
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
295
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 22:59
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-19 14:46, H2O wrote:
I do agree to overload sequencer with channels and auxs to check better both of sequencers but the problem is my host which allows me to use only 800kb files and i have reached monthly bandwitch limit.
Second problem is that ppl tend to say bullshit, it doesn't matter if we will make a test some say without reading the test material would say it is fake or say some nonsense like Baphomet Engine or Analog Xperience.
|
|
Dear H20,
You are a master engineer master!! Keep your good nonsense, just to warning you, we always work with FL Studio (Not 5.0) (Espanta Santo released on Alkaloid was sequenced on FL Studio 4.0) and in our humble opinion if you wanna work with 24bits you should forget FL Studio. For sure we agree with you that FL Studio is much better relation MONEY VS. BENEFITS than the other sequencer softwares.
Just a comment.. nothing personal with FL Studio or you!
Best Regards!
-------
Manic Dragon Records
http://www.myspace.com/baphometengine
2to6 Records |
|
|
|
High Pulse
Darkpsy
Started Topics :
57
Posts :
1187
Posted : Dec 25, 2004 02:52
|
somebody open the mouth and say the true 
for mastering final rec or even to simple final rec for a user , eheh logic ,cubase or nuendo or protools
the rest really forget heeh
fruity is nice to start making music , start understanding the basic moves , and of course its a program that going bether and bether all the days , but ... open the eyes ,
"HIGH PULSE" AKA FUSION OF DARKPSY PROJECTS
http://www.myspace.com/highpulsemusic
http://www.beatbiz.net/artists/High-Pulse <- musiC FOR SELL. |
|
|
|
thockin
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
114
Posted : Dec 25, 2004 10:45
|
|
It's morons like you who make these statements with NO BASIS that make me want to do a test like this. |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 25, 2004 13:17
|
I thought the test you made just has proven why you can't get top notch results using fruity.
Of course if you make a test with 16 bit tracks you might prove that the mixing of truncated audio will sound the same with fruity and cubase or logic.
But you have to understand that for anyone concerned with acheiving good sound a test like that is totally uninteresting.
No serious engineer wants to work with truncated 16 bit audio.
Fruity is flawed, and you have proven it.
And still people who think that is morons!!
Pardon me....who's the moron here?
I think they happen to have a set of ears to use and is not suffering from a hybris of thinking they understand how all audio software works inside out.
I don't know the reason you could not notice in the tests you said you have done before that your audio was truncated.
Because you where convinced there should not be any difference.
Well, now you know there is.
Drop the theory and use your ears I would say.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 25, 2004 13:50
|
|
Moron is someone who talk here without argumentation, you all like to open threads"what is the best sequencer? hmmm Logic, no Cubase rules", it is test, real one. When others spend their time to check things you think you know. The difference is heard by ear only when you use large number of tracks between FL Producer and other, i do not believe anyone just made a complitely exact sequences with 24+ channels, then compare results. So your remarks are useless. At least Thockin as FL Producer user have a balls and time to make something about. |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 25, 2004 14:03
|
|
Baphomet Engine this one i refer only to you, since Darkpsy is lost case. Here we must say sort of things to prove nor say what we think or feel, i don't think any of us even know the track you talking about or you as an artist but one thing for sure you must be much more responsible when you are an artists even with one track released on some junk label. You must be responsible for your words. Think about. |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 25, 2004 14:21
|
I must say that this is really getting more and more like a mony python scetch or something.
Imagine there would be a test of car tyres like I was mentioning before.
One test first is carried out driving 20km/h.
People question the results of course.
New test is carried out now driving 80km/h.
One brand has a threading that is not according to accepted standards and there is plenty of reports about difficulties with this tyre in handling the corners.
Now new tests is made where you drive only straight to be able to compare all tyres since the illegal threading would show to be flawed otherwise.
Come on...just give the car a tough ride, if some tyres can't handle well to "drive" in 24 bit with more than 16 tracks people should know that really.
From all I can gather from this testing it would be good material for a comedy show but not be able to convince anyone that sound engines is 100% identical.
The rules for the test was set bu thockin.
After finding a problem in the sound engine of one sequencer and finding out from the developer what the problem was caused by you change the rules??
Partial and questionable results will be all you are left with.
I would like to see a serious test using the sequencers as they are supposed to be used pratically to have a place where people could go and get help to find the one they think sound good.
But that has of course to be done using minimum 16 channels, FX and VSTi's in a way that is considered acceptable standards for digital audio.
If we could get some serious testing together it could maybe encourage image line and propellerheads for example to look deeper in to what they can improve to be able to appeal to amateurs and pros as well as everyone inbetween.
I really like orion and live myself and would easily switch away from logic if they sounded a bit better.
Music making should be easy and fun, but I want it to sound good as well.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 25, 2004 14:31
|
Spindrift it is not a Holy Grail, we trying when Image Line do not care at all, many send them already same emails for years but they find to sign Mike Oldfield to advertise is much more promotional that to change import and export features.
P.s. all wannabe artists, get here and see discography of man who use FL Producer
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/mike_oldfield/albums.html
Then open your mouth. |
|
|
|
