Mix Engine Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob's Mods
  • Start date Start date
Well, here's my take on this, with Wavelab 5:

Using 2 different white noise files, 16/44.1 (I had laying around from mic tests I've been doing), I created a 2 track mix, master section down -6, then normalized (about a +2.7dB gain change, then using the same two files, an 8x 2 track mix, master section down -24dB, then normalized (similar gain change). One of the resulting mixes was reversed polarity, then the two mixes were summed. No dither was applied.

Analysis of the resulting mix shows noise in the least significant bit only (peak level of -90dB). It's possible that performance would be better using 24 bit or 32 bit float files to begin with, but I wanted a worst-case test, since I work with 16 bit files more often than I'd like. Maybe later I'll try the 24 bit test.

It's also possible that the difference is due to the two stage gain normalization process, but then I wanted a "real world" test, and as far as I can tell, it isn't possible to set precise gain changes using the Wavelab Master section, whereas normalization is calculated to three significant digits (in decibels).

Here is the FFT of the resulting mix:
 
Ray, I actually do make good money off my opinion. A hired engineer is pretty much hired for their opinions. I make a living off my studio and off of live engineering and have been doing so for 10+ years. As for my spelling, I am perfectly capable of proper grammar and spelling. The problem here is that I just do not type well and don't have the patience to go back and proof or correct all of my errors. Basically, my mind kicks things out quicker than my hands can translate them. Regarding the name calling, you are most certainly right. I should refrain from any of that. As a matter of fact, I did. In re-reading my post, I never once called you any names. I agree that I got a little heated, but never resorted to an actual personal attack.

Now, back to the programs in question here.... Samplitude, IN NO WAY, is a sonic superior to any of the other major audio applications out there. At least concerning the "professional" grade applications. For years now I have been listening to the Pro Tools Users talking about how much better their application is. How easy it is, how natural, and how it sounds better. Then there is the Logic folks. They tend to laugh at the Pro Tools folks accusing them of "falling for the hype" and tout their application as the "be all end all". About a year ago there was a real push for SAW pro on certain forums. It was said that SAW was by far the best one out there and easily outperformed all of the others. For some time now I have been listening to the Sonar crowd talking about how much better Sonar was than Cubase for their own various reasons. Now, I personally am a Cubase SX user. However, even in the Cubase forums I try and stand up for other applications when people decide they want to hop on their high horse and parade around the forum flying their software high on their flag. It is silly. Nowadays all of the professional software is pretty capable. Sure some offer a few more features, while others may offer certain performance advantages. In the end however, they all come at a price. Every time one manufacturer offers one advantage, it seems to come at the cost of another. One other common factor here is that NO group of supporters in these forums has yet to offer any proof of any one programs dominance in any area. Over the years having to use various different software at various different studios, I have found one thing to be true. Each software application is different. As a result, each one requires a different approach for it to not feel completely foreign and or incapable. I understand completely that I am VERY familiar with the Steinberg line (Cubase and Nuendo). As a result, when I open Samplitude or Logic or Sonar, it feels cluttered unlogical, and gimmicky. When I open Vegas, or Audition it feels too simple. Almost like a toy. Pro Tools still feels like a happy medium to me, as well as Digital Performer. However, I prefer a PC for my use, and do not like the thought of being locked into a very limited market of selection (i.e. the Digidesign proprietary monster). For me, Cubase feels the most like it gets out of my way, but still offers me all of the tools I need to do my job. Cubase makes me feel more like an analog setup than the others. Are there issues? Sure there are. There are definitely things I might like to change. I do frequently sit down and spend several hours with other offerings. I read through the help menu's and getting started sections, I tinker with things, and I sit there and mix songs. I think it is a good idea for me to reevaluate what is out there occasionally. Sooner or later someone may actually release something that I like better. However, it has not really happened yet. Samplitude is no exception here. I will sit down with v8 and give it another run through, but once again, as of yet, it has not impressed me in any way that would make me actually change my software and go through that headache.

The end result will be this, regardless of who you are. Your mixes will not sound any better (or at least not to any real or appreciable degree) in Samplitude, Logic, Pro Tools, Cubase, Sonar etc... If they do it is purely because YOU did them better in that application. Not because the application did its math so well that it just sounded better. The problem here is that it is very hard to do a scientific test. Each individual program has far too many options and settings to really know for certain that each program is competing on a fair enough level for an accurate competition.
 
xstatic said:
Now, back to the programs in question here.... Samplitude, IN NO WAY, is a sonic superior to any of the other major audio applications out there.
Click to expand...


I dont agree at all. I respect your opinion, but in no way take it as truth.
I hear a difference, as do many other engineers I know. I work in Classical recording , where every little thing jumps out at you, nothing covered by compression, reverb, gates, limiting.....Ive used many , many DAWs , and no matter how much you or anyone else tells me there is no difference, I just dont buy it.
Testing is ok for the technical types...., but there is no substitute for what our ears tell us. You can preach the opposite until the end of time, but I aint buyin any..

It looks as though you have come to your own personal decision that they all sound the same.I am fine with that.. but please dont try to pass that off as Gospel .it just isnt. Your suggestions carry no more weight than what I said.
 
Actually, I do agree that they all may sound a little different. My point here... which actually sounds "better"? How can you take take the fairly minor differences and definitively say which is "better". Remember, for every person that says that Samplitude sounds better, there are probably two that say that Cubase does, 4 that say that Sonar does, and 20 that say that Pro Tools does. You don't have to take my statement as truth. However, if you want to use other peoples opinions as a basis for which sounds better, than your case shows me that Samplitude sounds the worst out of the major applications (which I personally do not believe) since there are most likely 20 times (probably actually 100 times) or more people who think that Pro Tools sounds better. I would also venture a guess that Pro Tools makes an appearance on more than 100 times as many CLASSICAL albums as Samplitude does. Following this Logic you would be a fool to use Samplitude. This however is not the logic that I choose to follow and in no way do I agree with it, but it does prove my point a little. I do have no doubt in my mind that you prefer Samplitude, and for YOUR own reasons. To come here and definitively say that Samplitude sounds better though is absolutely ignorant in my opinion.
 
I can see you like to share your opinion. Im still not buying. I will agree to disagree, but absolutely stand by what I said. and if you dont own/use samplitude Pro V8 or Sequoia, you arent in any way qualified to comment, IMHO of course. ;) to do so would be absolutely ignorant.In my opinion.


Pro Tools--no comment..though I will say a lot of classical albums released nowadays sound like shit. in my opinion

Telarc,(my favorite label) just ordered a Sequoia System. Maybe I should ask them why. in my opinion










xstatic said:
Actually, I do agree that they all may sound a little different. My point here... which actually sounds "better"? How can you take take the fairly minor differences and definitively say which is "better". Remember, for every person that says that Samplitude sounds better, there are probably two that say that Cubase does, 4 that say that Sonar does, and 20 that say that Pro Tools does. You don't have to take my statement as truth. However, if you want to use other peoples opinions as a basis for which sounds better, than your case shows me that Samplitude sounds the worst out of the major applications (which I personally do not believe) since there are most likely 20 times (probably actually 100 times) or more people who think that Pro Tools sounds better. I would also venture a guess that Pro Tools makes an appearance on more than 100 times as many CLASSICAL albums as Samplitude does. Following this Logic you would be a fool to use Samplitude. This however is not the logic that I choose to follow and in no way do I agree with it, but it does prove my point a little. I do have no doubt in my mind that you prefer Samplitude, and for YOUR own reasons. To come here and definitively say that Samplitude sounds better though is absolutely ignorant in my opinion.
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted by xstatic
Now, back to the programs in question here.... Samplitude, IN NO WAY, is a sonic superior to any of the other major audio applications out there.



I disagree in a big way and don't respect your opinion.

You should not be getting paid for anything audio if you feel this way.
 
yeah ill chime in

I agree with Ray and say Samplitude beats the shit out of those daw's other than saw and radar. And I have proof, yeah i may be young but ive ran through em all. If your in pootools and dont have an hd system your wasting your time, 2nd ya 002 but guess what u have to use the adat i/o to relly get that shit singing. Nuendo still sounds like mudd 2 too me after $2,000 off upgrades now dont get me wrong i love the ease and editing of Nuendo but the sound engine sucks ass, come on 1,500 and i cant use the eq's or comp. But im on the samp band wagon till i find something new but for now me and ray are gonna sit here and get this money will u chickens still fuss and argue.
 
I'm going to try to set aside my bias for Samplitude here as I address a couple of points. First, of course no one has "proven" any of these programs to be superior, any more than anyone can "prove" that one wine is superior to another. Second, while there are the standard YMMVs, the IMHOs, etc., there is an implied personal opinion in any statement made about audio, and everyone having to spell that out for everysingle statement made in these forums would get kind of silly.
Now, IMEO, any pairing of software and engineer is going to have a degree of matching that provides a sort of transfer function. The quality of the output is both a function of the sound of that software, and the degree to which that software's methodoligy and tools facilitate that engineer's best work. So even if we could agree on which particular software sounds the best in some scientific method, it is irrelavent to the real world of what tool works best for what AE.
Lastly..... Spelling doesn't count! ;)
 
Seems like a simple mix engine question is a can of worms. Like Democrates and Republicans.
 
Killah, it seems to me like you might want to refrain from commenting about Samplitude. Based on your posts over in the other Samplitude thread, I would say that you probably have not used Samplitude until maybe yesterday. So how is it that you can comment on Samplitude here and back it up like you are a life long die hard supporter? I may not agree with BigRay (we do have the right to disagree), but I can at least respect the fact that he does have an opinion.

Personally, I am inclined to fall somewhat on the side of Robert D's statements here. It seems like he has grasped the concept that I attempted to put forth here. The differnces in the actual sound of the actual software is FAR less than the differences in the different engineers and how each one might feel about using each individual software.

As far as Telarc goes... how does it matter at all what Telarc just bought? Unless of course you want want to play the name game. If however we go there, once again Samplitude would lose by a landslide, which is not fair to Samplitude. Now, as far as recent classical music sounding like shit. Sounds an awful lot like an opinion to me. So am I now to believe that BigRay has the only ears in this world for classical music? Am I to believe that TelArc will only release classical music tracked and/or mixed in Samplitube? Am I to believe that classical music sounds like crap now BECAUSE Pro Tools was used and not Samplitude? These are the implications that you seem to be making Ray. Think about them closely before you start bible thumping for something. In my opinion you are actually making Samplitude much more unattractive to me. My bet is that the majoruty of Telarc releases still will not be done in Samplitude. Not only that, but do you know why they actually bought it and what they will actually use it for? I personally know a lot of people who like using Samplitude as their software of choice for mastering, but not for actual tracking and mixing.

Do I need to own Samplitude to have an opinion on it? Hell no. Why would I own something that I do not particularly want or care for? Have I used it? Sure. On at least 5 different projects so far. Did I hate it? No. Would I have preferred to use Cubase? Yes. Does it really matter that much? No.

Killah mentioned not being able to use compression and EQ's in Cubase (Nuendo). Once again a matter of preference. With good tracks I can use the stock Steinberg stuff no problem. I do agree however that they are certainly not the highest quality nor are they the best stock sounds. However, none of that is "mix engine" so is a completely moot point in this particular thread.

I understand that we do all have our own likes and dislikes. There is certain equipment that we each have that we really like, and as a result reccomend, and sometimes frequently. However, unlike certain other people, I also understand that I can be bullheaded and stubborn, and I am a little set in my ways (they work well for me). In the end though I do learn from others and am always open to new things and techniques and try and always understand where and a why a person is coming from where they are. With you Ray, I certainly do not feel that. You have now added a third thing that I am aware to your audio bible thumping... Samplitude/Sequoia Actually, maybe even more than that. So far I know that you only like MODIFIED U87's because they always sound better regardless of the source, DAV BG-01's because David Gilmour uses them and they blow away all other preamps, Mytek converters because they are the absolute best (even though the Mytek's you are using are the budget Mytek's), and now Samplitude and Sequoia. I am sure anyone using anything else is sub par.....
 
I personally know a lot of people who like using Samplitude as their software etc etc

Telarc just commissioned a DAW for field use. IE recording/mixing/mastering. This according to Jeff Sheridan, Sequoias head Support man.

why did I mention them??not at all to name drop. I was just thinking out loud.as I know someone in that camp, and will probably ask them why they prefer to use Seq/Samp over other products.. just out of curiosity.
Somehow I dont think dropping classical label names here would do any good, if I were doing that..which im not. that notion is pretty laughable actually.




you are using are the budget Mytek's),
budget mytek :D Does mytek even have a budget line?? :eek: (nope, it is the stereo 192. ..you must be thinking of the Stereo 96.. The mytek 8x192(same thing as the 192, but X 8 and with DSD capability).is more expensive, but I have one of those on order too..Please educate yourself before commenting on what I use. If youd like I can send you a word document outlining all my gear so that you are better prepared next time. ;)

and now Samplitude and Sequoia. I am sure anyone using anything else is sub par....

to my ears yes. so what?


As far as Telarc goes... how does it matter at all what Telarc just bought?


It doesnt particularly, but as I know someone there, I was talking aloud, mentioning that I could ask them why they use Seq/Samp over the others.
trigger happy, eh :p

With you Ray, I certainly do not feel that.

Im sorry, were you supposed to? I do my thing, dont really care what anyone else learns from me. Last time I checked ive earned the right to do as I damn well please.I will continue to do so. Ive fought and served in two wars, and done my share of hard living and coming up through the ranks. (both civilian and military). If I want to bible thump, best damn well look away or cover your ears...itll come regardless of what you may have to say about it. Thats just the way I am. If I have offended your delicate sensitivities, ..thats just an unfortunate side effect. Suck it up and drive on.

but... why does what I say bother you so much, that you feel so inclined to write a dissertation on the subject??I know males typically posture when intimidated, which I dont think is the case with you, stud.


maybe you just comment because you are a stubborn, obnoxious prick yourself. Thats my guess.

At any rate, id suggest not wasting your advice on me.I appreciate the thought though.
I mean that in the spirit of which it was intended.

So, with all this venting and whatnot, what are you hoping to accomplish?
That I will somehow be shamed into surrender and fall at your feet, sobbing?
Not a chance. Im twice as stubborn as you, 3 times as mean. ;)

feel free to PM me if you want to further this discussion. Id rather not clutter up Mr. Bobs thread any longer. He is a very nice guy.

Praise God from whom all blessings flow,

praise him all creatures here below

praise him above ye heavenly host,

praise father son and holy ghost..

A-----MEN...
 
B4 you guys put me on blast!

1. yes ive used saw, gui is weird, but the mix bus sounds nice too me.

2. X ive been using samp but its an older version, and im ready to just go ahead and get on 8.

3. im being subjective to my ears, so i dont need anyone to E-argue with me.

4. And i said i loved nuendo's editing and so forth, but honestly i dont know why theirs just this muddyness i get fromt it. And samplitudes plugins are really great out the box sorry but its the truth. But like i said im subjected to my own opinions, so we will leave it has that. But samp still runs the mixing court to me.

and thats the bottom line cuz stone cold said so.
 
My soul (sole?) interest in asking this question was to get a sense of where Sonar 5 compares mix engine wise against some of the other apps out on the market. Being able to mix an unlimited amount of tracks is really meaningless if they don't mix well.
 
Bob's Mods said:
My soul (sole?) interest in asking this question was to get a sense of where Sonar 5 compares mix engine wise against some of the other apps out on the market. Being able to mix an unlimited amount of tracks is really meaningless if they don't mix well.
Click to expand...
Where does it fit with your ears?

Are you happy with the sound of it's mix engine?

A.) If the answer is an unqualified "Yes", then case closed. Don't worry about it.

B.) If your ears question the sound of the mix engine, then try some demos of some of it's competition and see how it goes. As you can see by these responses, asking others is about as useful as asking them which monitors sound better or which microphone is best; everybody has a different opinion because everybody has different ears, different tastes, and (most importantly) different levels of ear training.

C.) If you are unhappy with the sound of your mixes but don't know if it's because of your engine or because of your gear or your technique, then it's way too early to worry about your mix engine; you have a lot of other more important wrinkles to iron out first.

G.
 
I think that is the ultimate answer to the mix engine question.


Good one G
 
It's all good Ray. I know I am an asshole. I never claimed to be anything else. I am however an open minded one. As far as budget Mytek, i should be clear on that. Even the 96 and 192 are EXCELLENT converters. However, Mytek also makes some converters that cost significantly more. I think they might be a little upset if you considered that an apples to apples comparison. My only complaint there is that once agin, in another thread you have hopped on the high horse and talked about how much better they were than all other converters.

So, are you really 29? If so, how is it that you have made your living for 20 years in the audio industry? As far as the wars and serving time goes, you will always have my respect for that, but that does not automatically carry over into all other aspects of life. In the end though, whether I agree with you, like you, or what not, it really does not matter. It is not important to me and you are right in the fact that you have the right to spout off whatever you like. On the same token though, I have a right to call bullshit.

Killa, if you have used Samplitude for a while, than I agree you are qualified to at least have some sort of an opinion based on experience. You have my apologies for that, but the ither thread lead me to believe differently which is where I was coming from there. As far as Nuendo being muddy, that may well be your opinion. It's funny though that the Steinberg apps are showing up in more professional studios than any of the other PC apps. I would imagine noone esle has a hard time making Nuendo not sound muddy. Now, having better stock plugins does seem like a valid reason to purchase one over the other. I agree that the stock Steinberg stuff is lacking, but it's mostly just the EQ. Even then, there is a better EQ that comes with Steinberg apps you can load into your insert chain should you want. Any way you look at it though, I do not think that ANY of the current apps come with stock plug ins that compare well with some of the better add on stuff (which is what I primarily use). And once again, all that is not really a part of the "MIX ENGINE" anyhow. But, like I said, should be a valid reason why you might want to get one and not the other.

So, there are certainly differences, but I have not heard or seen any proof positive yet that any one is really "better" than another. Convince me and maybe I will switch. In the end the good ol analog desk still sounds better to me anyhow:D
 
However, Mytek also makes some converters that cost significantly more. I think they might be a little upset if you considered that an apples to apples comparison.


Once again, research a little. The 8x192 is the top of the line, fella.The 192 is the newest version. 8x192 is the 8ch version of that. the stereo 96 before that. I know! I own a lot of their products. And no, they are fine with comparisons. I talk to david or michal at least once every two weeks. Please dont speak for them. I know them both fairly well.



[/I]So, are you really 29? If so, how is it that you have made your living for 20 years in the audio industry? [/I]

30 now. Ive been singing since the ripe age of 10. Started out singing with my Grandfathers Southern Gospel Quartet, my voice changed at a REALLY young age. I was quite the freak. (still am, vocally)(yep, we toured every weekend and all summer long until I was 15 and quit the group) and have been singing/recording ever since. Got my music degree, did freelance work(I do voiceovers, Classical Music, Southern Gospel, Barbershop, Kantor Duties, MC duties, PSAs)(I have an unusually low voice, keeps me employed).in addition to the Location Classical Recording gig.. after school.....got strung out on assorted things, joined the army, went to war twice.., kept singing, and started back recording. Ive put my time in, I know a few things.


I have a right to call bullshit.

sure you do! it is of no consequence,and doesnt change anything,.. but you are absolutely right.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Where does it fit with your ears?

Are you happy with the sound of it's mix engine?

G.
Click to expand...

I would say I'm reasonably content with it as compared to previous versions. I still think it does not provide as good a track to track definition as I've heard from decent commercial recordings but it will have to do. I do not expect to pony up huge green and fight my way through a huge learning curve just to get cutting edge mixing capability. So yeah, I'm happy.

Bob the Mod Guy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top