MOTUnation.com

The point of my post is, if the files sum to zero (with one polarity inverted) there can BE no sound difference. Nothing subjective about it.

Gee... I just don't know. Since you're talking about the sound of the DAW, would there really be no substitute from some sort of A/B test where there output of both programs via identical interfaces could be played in synch and then then you could switch between the two stereo outs feeding the same monitoring chain? At the same exact volume? And then it would have to be double blind, etc.

I have noticed that I have been able to load DP 6.01 and LogicExpress 8 simultaneously and actually have BOTH of them play at the same time playing completely different projects out my HD192. The wonders of CoreAudio I guess? I suppose one text might be to simply load the exact same stereo file of a complete mix into DP and Logic and have someone alternatively switch back and forth between apps, stopping one, starting the other, back and forth while the listener is blind folded an sitting in the sweet spot. My guess is that one would be really hard pressed to consistently pick which is which... but it would be interesting to try. I may set that up here and get a friend to test me on it.

Theoretically though, if it were coming through the SAME output pair on my HD192, that would completely eliminate the D>A conversion as a variable. Hmmmmmmmmm... and clocking is all in the hardware realm isn't it? I mean DP or Logic couldn't someone affect that aspect... that's hardwired into the interface if using a PCI-424 and HD192 or other MOTU PCI interface. I wonder if a firewire interface is any different? Sigh...

kgdrum wrote:I think the different sounds in the various daws are mostly that they use different pan laws,and I guess if they use various a-->d or d-->a example 32 bit floating etc...... they all have some kind of sonic signature.

Agreed, KG.

kgdrum wrote:ot:Monkey Man, that's a GREAT AVATAR!!!

Thank you, KG. The movie snip was taken at MonkeyLabs™ principle testing facility back in the days when I initially attempted to explore the boundaries of human experience. In true monkey style, my research resulted in a best-selling poo-duct down here in Jungleville - the MonkeyLabs Holographic PornGrinder™. That's me fiddlin' with an early, somewhat glitchy prototype.

I hope the movement doesn't distract 'Cornies too much; I know I was very distracted that day. LOL

WHile I don't doubt the OP is hearing a different sound, I can't help but think of the producers who insist on 5 mixes. You send them the same mix (5 copies) and they WILL hear a difference. Just knowing it is coming from one app or another will influence our little brains and make us think it is different.

The test (IMO) is to bounce the sample out of both apps and play it back thru quicktime and/or iTunes (set to a neutral EQ) and see if you can hear a difference. But hearing is a funny thing. Ask any conductor, engineer or others involved with critical listening. You can focus on certain things and place other stuff in the mix on a lower priority; not unlike being in a room with 100 people all talking at once - yet you can focus on a single voice or sound and place all others in the background. This may be what our OP is experiencing. And maybe there IS a difference, but until we hear what he is talking about we will never be able to decide for ourselves.

So where's the samples???

HCMarkus wrote:The point of my post is, if the files sum to zero (with one polarity inverted) there can BE no sound difference. Nothing subjective about it.

At the risk of being redundant, is above comment being somehow lost in some sort of phase cancellation here at Motonation, summing with itself to zero, hence, rendering it imperceptible to all but its author? Which is exactly the point of my comment.

HCMarkus wrote:

HCMarkus wrote:The point of my post is, if the files sum to zero (with one polarity inverted) there can BE no sound difference. Nothing subjective about it.

At the risk of being redundant, is above comment being somehow lost in some sort of phase cancellation here at Motonation, summing with itself to zero, hence, rendering it imperceptible to all but its author? Which is exactly the point of my comment.

I'd still like to hear it. If the files are identical and the apps make them sound different on playback, then clearly there is something going on in the app. But I'd still like to see the files posted. That too seems to have been in the MOTUNationphasecancellation.bundle.

As been mentioned before, we are looking at two separate issues:

1. Do the two DAWs play back the same file differently?
2. Do the two DAWs print different files when given the same input?

The first is harder to test reliably, but is also less consequential. Assuming they do play back with small differences, it's like different speakers or different rooms (and I would assume far less dramatic than say, the difference between two rooms using the same gear.) So for the professional user #1 is of less consequence, you find the one DAW you like and create.

The second is far more important to us, but is also far easier to test, no? - i.e. feed a CD player's analog output with the same content through the same high-end converter at the same level into the same input, print twice (once in each DAW), line up and compare. One could use a custom-prepared CD with a precise two-pop or even a digitally created spike for the purpose of lining up the two.

...

I used to have a girlfriend who would do this to me...

Kubi wrote:As been mentioned before, we are looking at two separate issues:

1. Do the two DAWs play back the same file differently?
2. Do the two DAWs print different files when given the same input?

The first is harder to test reliably, but is also less consequential. Assuming they do play back with small differences, it's like different speakers or different rooms (and I would assume far less dramatic than say, the difference between two rooms using the same gear.) So for the professional user #1 is of less consequence, you find the one DAW you like and create.

The second is far more important to us, but is also far easier to test, no? - i.e. feed a CD player's analog output with the same content through the same high-end converter at the same level into the same input, print twice (once in each DAW), line up and compare. One could use a custom-prepared CD with a precise two-pop or even a digitally created spike for the purpose of lining up the two.

Well stated Kubi.

Resonant Alien wrote:RE: the 'null test': I know this is often viewed as the conclusive objective proof that two things sound exactly the same, but I am not totally convinced that is true (again, just my personal opinion). The 'null test' proves that two audio files have the same, or 99.9xxx% same, frequency response.

Sorry, no. The null test proves that two files are 100% identical. No freq response, no 99.9%, no personal opinion involved. Identical. Period. No "there's something we don't know." A clone is a clone is a clone. Nothing relative here. These are numbers, not analog measurements. Identical. ('k, I think I made my point....)

That of course doesn't mean that the sound the same, since sound (when coming from digital sources) is dependent on the interpretation of data, including factors from error correction to speaker position and everything in between.

But to keep putting this discussion into a perspective that matters to professional creators: It is irrelevant (or rather, not so relevant) if different DAWs sound slightly different from one another (within reason.) It is very relevant if different DAWs print different files if given the same input.

Here's an analogy: It is irrelevant that two copies of the same CD will sound slightly different when played back on different systems. That's a given, and you just track, produce, mix and master to a certain standard of excellence that is true to the ideals of the medium and at the same time satisfies the average playback environment's needs. But it would be very relevant (read: disastrous) if for some technical reason two copies of the same CD had differences in the actual data they contain. That would be a real problem that demands immediate correction.

That's what we're talking about here.

Resonant Alien wrote:Anyway, my intention with starting this post was not to begin yet another endless DP vs. X debate,

Oh my gosh. First it was Opcode's Vision. Then Cubase and Cakewalk. Then Pro Tools. Then Logic. Then Acid, and a bunch of other minor players. Now there's this X! What are we gonna do? So... what does it do? Better cross-fades than DP? Darn that X!




Shooosh

Shooshie wrote:So... what does it do? Better cross-fades than DP? Darn that X!

The promo says it does markers for commercial spots better and that makes your sound better. The marketing folks wanted the catch phrase to be:

X Markers the Spot!

They finally settled for:

Nobody does it better than your X!

There's even a spinoff excel type database for keeping track of very large trees. They call it...

X-Cell-Ent

...

Resonant Alien wrote: well, that's kind of my point, and I think you actually restated exactly what I said, just in a slightly different way. just because two files have exactly the same frequency response does not necessarily mean that they will sound the same, because the human ear does not interpret frequency response curves alone, it is interpreting sound waves, and there is more information in a sound wave than just frequencies. There is a physical element of a sound wave that cannot be measured by a device that measures only frequencies, and I often wonder if this physical element of the sound wave, which our ears can pick up and interpret, is not what people often mean when they say something sounds "punchier".

No, sorry that's not what I said at all. There's no "measuring" involved in a null test. You're not measuring a sound wave, there is no sound wave in digital. It's a file.

When two files null they consist of the exact same data. They are identical. A sound file is not the measurement of an object, it is the object, which is why what you just wrote, while being dead on for analog audio (which by definition can only be measured or translated, but you can never look at the thing itself) doesn't pertain to digital audio at all.

Sorry for geeking out here...