Sound Quality difference between Sonar 1 vs 2?

[Middleman]

After all my complaining I bit the bullet and did the upgrade. The package was waiting at my door when I got home today.

Ok, am I hearing things or is there a smoother quality to files recorded in Sonar 1 and played back in Sonar 2?

Sound wise 2.0 seems not a little better but alot better. Did anyone else notice this or am I too tired from work to tell? Did they tweak the engine on this or what?

I am pleased so far. Love the drop downs for drum tracks in midi.

 

[johnhoe]

Did you get sonar 2 xl? Because it comes with a beautiful compressor and equaliser from Timeworks. I find 2 is SO different its like the difference between CWPA 9 and sonar 1, but as to the audio quality I can't honestly tell.

 

[Teacher]

as far as sound quality i'd say their the same....i'm pretty sure sonar 1 dawned the new audio engine, and its probably the same one on 2....i don't recall them saying on the website they implemented a new or improved the audio engine. maybe ur just getting to be a better tracker and mixer....experience the best teacher...

 

[guitar ed]

Hi, guys
I've seen questions like this before, and it has sparked a few of my own. I have a problem with this issue of 'sound quality' from one program to another. I've been at this computer recording thing for about 2 years now. I have tried just about every recording app that my computer will handle, and though I've noticed differences in volume of tracks played back, I just can't accept the theory that one program can make digital audio data 'sound' better than another. I may be opening myself up to a flame-fest, but isn't a clip recorded at 24 bit, 44.1k just that? How can an audio clip recorded in Sonar at 24 bit, 44.1k sound better or worse than an audio clip recorded in Samplitude at 24 bit, 44.1k? Does it have to do with the audio drivers, or maybe the sound engines? And if so, is this sound engine technology from one manufacturer to another a closely guarded secret, kinda like a good buffalo wing sauce? Also, is there like a major difference between Cakewalk and Samplitude in terms of sound engine technology? I just can't get my head around this one. It's digital data, and it has to be processed as such, and I can't figure out how this processing can be so different from one product to another that the actual 'sound' can be compared as better or worse. Plug-Ins are a different story, and I understand how you can make improvements to the overall sound, but I'm talking about audio data with no FX applied. You can either help me out with this, or call me an asshole and send me back to the basement, but I am a bit corn-fused about this. Thanks

ed

 

[James Argo]

Me too...
I also used to be so confused, untill a friend of mine told me, that every app. software gives different result on quality. We can't say one is better than another since too many parameter to compare 'em. But he told me basicaly, every apps. have some particular system - lets call it "engine" - that makes it good on some parameter. It could how efficient the app. interact with your hardware such like HD, RAM, etc... how they ride the driver to go... walk? run? etc... How actually they accesing the DirX... How they do this and that... etc... We should stick it in our mind, that since Windows put many hiden layer to the PC audio system to go (...that's it, the long way between your guitar/mic through the input card, Chip A, Chip B, Chip C, Processor A, Processor B, bla...bla...bla... Harddisk. Harddisk, Bla...bla...bla... Line Out / burn to CD )... There's so many way and posibility to obtain the best result. Even with same sampling rate / frequency...

"Same word, same pen, same papper, different writer..."

Hey... it's only my though anyway... Just tell me if I'm wrong...