MIDI Life Crisis wrote:I'm curious about a few things, Radiogal.
What order were the DAWs employed (which was first, second, third, etc.).
Was that order changed over the course of the test or was the order the DAWs were used the same every time?
To be somewhat empirical, changing the order several times and even replaying the same sample several times and recording specific observations would yield a 'more accurate' or at least believable result.
If the same order was employed each time, it could be argued that other factors may have colored the results, such as ear fatigue, familiarity with the recording, anticipation of high and low points by the listener, etc.
Any comments on this aspect?
Thanks.
"We compared different looped material in sections, played on MBP nr 1,2,3,4 and 5 and even randomly."
Meaning: it was MBP 1-5 and backwards MBP 5-1, than randomly. (that´s why this test took 2,5 hours...)
Only 1 person (the tech operator) that did the DAW switching had the random list with these variations written down.
You can read from my first post what DAW was played first and second, third, fourth and fifth:
Here is the list again.
MBP 1= Digital Performer
MBP 2= ProTools 9
MBP 3= Logic 9
MBP 4= ProTools 10
MBP 5= Cubase (latest version)