Nuendo's Digital Mix Buss

  • Thread starter Thread starter LeeRosario
  • Start date Start date
LeeRosario

LeeRosario

New member
I'm trying to find documentation on this subject, and I was wondering if anyone had an idea where I can find this.

I'm doing some personal studies, so any help would be appreciated.


Versions 2-3 in specific.

Lee
 
Are you talking about the audio summing engine? If so, do some research on DSP algorithms, summing should be on there. Or maybe you'd have better luck searching for digital audio summing algorithms or "floating point summing algorithms".

All software should follow the theory/physics of digital audio pretty strictly. I don't know of a software that has something different going on in the summing, if it is then it is doing it "mathematically incorrect" (which I suppose is not necessarily a bad thing when it comes to recording music).

The digital summing document should apply pretty much to all DAWs.

To get info specific to Nuendo, try their website. But this is usually something that is not published unless there were claims of the software doing something incorrectly.
 
theoretically.

Plus I understand the theory behind that. What I can't understand is what specifically is making Nuendo stand out over some of the others. This is comparing Pro Tools LE, Logic, and Sony Vegas (which I absolutely dislike).

The results I've been hearing from a few different platforms has been inconsistant. Based on whats availible, I'm slowly shifting into Nuendo for mixing solely based off of the comparisons I've been making.

This is not including the 48-bit double precision on a PT HD rig I come across in the studio on occasion, but rather something that can handle an equal task at home.
 
Last edited:
If you're really interested, record a 44.1KHz/16 or 24-bit sine wav, or a few of them at different frequencies. Add them on separate tracks, then render.

Do this on several different DAWs. Then compare the output WAV files.

Maybe Neuendo is doing something different or "incorrect" that other software isn't and that's what gives it a unique sound. Maybe they are using an analog-simulated algorithm on the summing. But I would guess it'd say so in the product description.
 
I appreciate the help, that's just not the answer I'm looking for.


Perhaps someone who uses Nuendo professionally. I'm looking more along professional lines.
 
Nuendo sounded no different to me in straight summing than any other DAW did, when there was NO PAN LAW applied!

Now, if you are doing a summing test with panning involved, you are now at the mercy of the DAW's pan law, which could vary greatly from DAW to DAW.
 
definitely. And I completely understand all that.


To elaborate a little more what's going on here. I've been doing side by side comparisons on a set of drum tracks (for starters) that I tracked recently and applied the exact same settings from a PT LE mix as I had on the Nuendo version.

No pan law, etc etc. What I was getting was better detail throughout the soundscape without hazzyness down the center channels. In fact, especially the center channel material. I even dumbed it down to 24-bit to even it out with LE, which is what I'm used to using at home anyway.

Stuff I can't really find out just through a set of sine wave and pink noise tests alone, which I've already done.

In PT LE, the image was not nearly as defined, especially all the center channel material, which really made me wonder of what exactly both where advertising.

In logic, there was still a bit of a difference but not by much. However, not a huge fan of logic, acid, nor Vegas. Not usually a fan of Nuendo.

Subsequently, processing such as EQ, FX and dynamics sounds alot better on Nuendo, which is also better defined. I can actually hear my verbs and FX the way they originally appear soloed.

My only guess is the ability to process at 32-bit, but I still feel there is something else going on there. I might of remembered hearing something about special dolby encoding/smoothing that goes on inside the summing amp, since it's used mostly for Post Production, but I can't get a definite answer.

I'm trying to find out if the extra money went into developing a specific set of algorithms?
Or is Nuendo just compensating some how?

Maybe I'm going crazy, but I actually hear this stuff...and it's like this night and day difference to me?
 
LeeRosario said:
definitely. And I completely understand all that.


To elaborate a little more what's going on here. I've been doing side by side comparisons on a set of drum tracks (for starters) that I tracked recently and applied the exact same settings from a PT LE mix as I had on the Nuendo version.

No pan law, etc etc. What I was getting was better detail throughout the soundscape without hazzyness down the center channels. In fact, especially the center channel material. I even dumbed it down to 24-bit to even it out with LE, which is what I'm used to using at home anyway.

Stuff I can't really find out just through a set of sine wave and pink noise tests alone, which I've already done.

In PT LE, the image was not nearly as defined, especially all the center channel material, which really made me wonder of what exactly both where advertising.

In logic, there was still a bit of a difference but not by much. However, not a huge fan of logic, acid, nor Vegas. Not usually a fan of Nuendo.

Subsequently, processing such as EQ, FX and dynamics sounds alot better on Nuendo, which is also better defined. I can actually hear my verbs and FX the way they originally appear soloed.

My only guess is the ability to process at 32-bit, but I still feel there is something else going on there. I might of remembered hearing something about special dolby encoding/smoothing that goes on inside the summing amp, since it's used mostly for Post Production, but I can't get a definite answer.

I'm trying to find out if the extra money went into developing a specific set of algorithms?
Or is Nuendo just compensating some how?

Maybe I'm going crazy, but I actually hear this stuff...and it's like this night and day difference to me?
Click to expand...

Send this to the Nuendo team and see if/how they respond. They may have your answer, or something that can explain.

Or maybe your ears are playing tricks on you.

I've used a small variety of software and never heard a difference between any of them, then again, I wasn't listening for one.

For quality of EQ, or other effects such as reverb, that depends on:

Is it a plugin that came with the software? (of course these will sound different than other ones)

What is the bit depth of the internal audio engine? Some use 32-bit float, others (I think Reaper?) use 64-bit. I could be wrong, but even this difference I would bet is inaudible unless you are running a huge project with tons of effects being used.
 
are you familiar with lynn fuston???? he's done a very indepth comparison of all the majors... there's a cd available called awesum dawsum... might be worth checking into....
 
dementedchord said:
are you familiar with lynn fuston???? he's done a very indepth comparison of all the majors... there's a cd available called awesum dawsum... might be worth checking into....
Click to expand...

can't say I have but sounds promising!
 
Ive been working all day on trying to put up a comprehensive test to end all this summing nonsense, and have gotten a lot of help from users of other apps. Some apps are messed up, but they arent messed up in any way which would make the difference between a song being a hit or not, or sounding good or not or even, dare I say, they are not even messed up enough to make an audible difference

People have been barking up the wrong tree for WAY too long

I will hopefully be posting this tonite
 
Have you tried a null test on the PT vs. Nuendo mixes? That will provide some insight into where the differences lie.

Also, rather than straight sine-wave tests, try some difficult tests for intermodulation distortion, like a 17, 17.75, 18.25, 18.5kHz, etc. sine wave sum, with panning and gain changes applied. Also test very quiet sine waves looking at behavior around the margins.
 
pipelineaudio said:
Ive been working all day on trying to put up a comprehensive test to end all this summing nonsense, and have gotten a lot of help from users of other apps. Some apps are messed up, but they arent messed up in any way which would make the difference between a song being a hit or not, or sounding good or not or even, dare I say, they are not even messed up enough to make an audible difference

People have been barking up the wrong tree for WAY too long

I will hopefully be posting this tonite
Click to expand...

With no disrespect to anyone,

I really think some are misunderstanding what I'm asking for here. I'm asking for the specifics behind how Nuendo deals with mixing tracks togther. As far as I've known as a professional engineer, that's "summing", correct? It's frustrating to get a lesson on summing when that's completely not what I'm asking for.

It's a matter of simply getting direction to some sort of article on Nuendo and how it sums up signals. Programmer notes. Something. I figured I'm not incredibly gifted at finding articles like that on the internet, so perhaps someone here is, or has professional knowledge on this.

I'm just looking for technical information that can quantify what I'm hearing. Like I said, I'm doing research of my own for a major project comming up that is almost ready to be mixed, a client who can't afford the cost of renting a properly equipped room, and if I want to keep this client, it's a matter of finding the best DAW to handle that task.

Instead, I'm getting answers like I've never set foot in a studio or audio school a day in my life. Like I said, I don't mean to downplay anybody here as a semi frequent visitor.

Just a simple link or personal in depth explination of Nuendo's process in comparison will do. Not the meaning of summing, personal theories in testing DAWs, or what 32-bit floating point means.

Demented Chord, I appreciate the link, it's very promising. Exactly what I was asking for.

Thanks again guys. If any articles come up, please, just be sure to keep posting.



edit: frankly, this came about because I was in shock to see how much of a difference there was between Pro Tools LE and Nuendo. Believe me, it's not easy to get me to move away from PT since that's what I do all of my work on.
 
err, I dont think you understand what you are asking. I posted the same thing as dementedchord, just my version is a little newer with the testing arguably a little stricter

Ideally, summing is just adding up the channels, a simple mathematical process
 
mshilarious said:
Have you tried a null test on the PT vs. Nuendo mixes? That will provide some insight into where the differences lie.

Also, rather than straight sine-wave tests, try some difficult tests for intermodulation distortion, like a 17, 17.75, 18.25, 18.5kHz, etc. sine wave sum, with panning and gain changes applied. Also test very quiet sine waves looking at behavior around the margins.
Click to expand...


In that order, I can't say I have. Only tests I've been taught in the past, mostly with pink noise and panning. I just read this and it reminding me of additional testing I can continue on.
 
pipelineaudio said:
err, I dont think you understand what you are asking. I posted the same thing as dementedchord, just my version is a little newer with the testing arguably a little stricter

Ideally, summing is just adding up the channels, a simple mathematical process
Click to expand...

I was going off the idea on how Pro Tools had an an article written by one of the programming staff a few years back explaining the specifics behind bussing in Pro Tools and the whole 48-bit double precision development.

[edit: perhaps as a form of showing off, but I can only speculate]

I figured Nuendo has to have something like that. I personally can't assume all programs are created equal?

I'll be sure to check out your study. It may help me out. I appreciate the suggestions.
 
BTW, the audio engine in Cubase SX is the same as Nuendo. You can save $1000 or so.

I've heard the difference too, I just figured it was the difference between pan law and the different plugins.
 
LeeRosario said:
I really think some are misunderstanding what I'm asking for here. I'm asking for the specifics behind how Nuendo deals with mixing tracks togther. As far as I've known as a professional engineer, that's "summing", correct?
Click to expand...

LeeRosario said:
It's a matter of simply getting direction to some sort of article on Nuendo and how it sums up signals.
Click to expand...

I'm just confused because you say you don't want answers about summing when you're asking about summing. :confused:
 
i dont write code or anything like that so my limited understanding is that the principal diff between nuendo/cubase and PT HD (not le???) is they both do double pricision but steinberg uses a 32bit float and PT a 48 bit fixed....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top