Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 81415161718
Results 171 to 178 of 178

Thread: IMO Logic sounds better than PT

  1. #171
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    3
    Okay, just for my own personal amusement, I conducted a couple of tests...

    TEST ONE:

    I conducted test number one from the above post. I took one AIFF, sent a copy of it around the world, through yahoo's mail servers, onto a data CD, onto a USB jump drive, and back into soundforge.

    THE RESULTS:

    Reversed phase on one clip and summed them up. "Maximum sample value: 0 [-Inf. dB, 0.00%]"
    Yup, it nulled out to 100% zeros. So the idea that copying a file to a different drive can alter the sound is officially nulled out to zero, as well.

    TEST TWO:

    Same reference AIFF file, burned as CD-DA using iTunes at 32x speed to the cheapest CD-R I could get my hands on. Ripped back at 48x as a WAV using soundforge, then phase reversed and mixed the with original audio file.

    Surely the jitter introduced by the 32x burning, the 48x ripping, the cheap CD-R, the old DVD burner and the subway sandwich grease on my fingers would make the audio on the CD sound an order of magnitude worse than the reference clip.

    THE RESULTS:

    "Maximum sample value: 0 [-Inf. dB, 0.00%]"

    Ooops! The audio burned to the cheap CD-R from Target was a precise 1-to-1 copy...

  2. #172
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    4,751
    Originally posted by Trent Turbington:
    <STRONG>Surely the jitter introduced by the 32x burning, the 48x ripping, the cheap CD-R, the old DVD burner and the subway sandwich grease on my fingers would make the audio on the CD sound an order of magnitude worse than the reference clip.</STRONG>
    Trent,

    Like you, I used to say "this is crap -- different CD media is all the same so long as there are not errors. Think about it: if there were uncorrected errors, CDs would be useless for computer data where even a one bit error in a critical place like a file-system would be massive."

    The issue is not digital copies or media. It's the type of playback device.

    When you use a computer, the data is read into a buffer and then if you are playing the CD the data is reclocked as the D/A converter reads from the buffer and reconstructs the analog waveform. So, the sound of different media here will not exist because what you are hearing is the sound of the converter and its clock.

    But, there's a whole set of CD players out there that DO NOT buffer and re-clock the data, but instead literally play it off the disc itself. I didn't beleive there was a difference in the sound myself until one of my musician clients demonstrated it on his home system to me and it was obvious. My 16x burns sounded "brittle" compared to a 1x burn, ON HIS SYSTEM ONLY.

    Not in my car, where my CD player uses a buffer to avoid skips.

    Not on my computer, where both discs were bit-for-bit the same. Just as in your test.

    But on crappy CD players. The kind that 80% of the US population owns.
    Jim Dugger
    Poorhouse Productions

    At 20 bits, you are on the verge of dynamic range covering fly-farts-at-20-feet to untolerable pain. Really, what more could we need?

  3. #173
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky
    Posts
    653
    Originally posted by smcoptyltd:
    <STRONG>...I've found their web page but the company does not exist anymore.

    Museatex...
    </STRONG>
    Museatex was Ed Meitner's old company, active 15-20 years ago. They made lots of nice stuff, very innovative, of course. I still have their little 55wpc amp. Regards, Sam
    I want a pony. -Dave Collins

    "Anyone who uses Pb-free solders has a faith-based engineering degree." -desert rat on edn.com, 7/30/08

    Murphy's law - "
    Anything that can go wrong, will." (Actually, this is Finagle's law, which in itself shows that Finagle was right.) - Bill Joy

    Blast!
    -Alamogordo naturalist, 1945

  4. #174
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    3
    Originally posted by Jim Dugger:
    <STRONG>
    The issue is not digital copies or media. It's the type of playback device.</STRONG>
    Well, I absolutely agree with you there. Different playback devices will are either buffered or unbuffered, and have different clock accuracies. At PLAYBACK ONLY, as you said.

    At least one person has suggested that digital copies from one hard drive to another can change the sound of your audio. The most prominent of those people went on to theorize that certain brands of hard drives sound better than others, and that reducing vibrations in the drive, and using higher quality drive cables can improve your sound. As someone who's been in the tech sector for a long time, I can't stress enough how incorrect AND impossible that is. Without a firm understanding of CRC, checksum, registers, stacks, buffers, etc, etc, etc; there's no way to make an informed statement on digital audio quality at the drive level. Okay, let's say you've got a a nice, thick hard drive cable with 24k gold connections. The data coming down that cable has as many as a few hundred million transistors to pass through before it ever reaches your ears. The data will pass through hundreds of soldered connections, several contact connections, and travel down microscopic traces on the PCB. I guarantee they aren't audiophile grade PCB traces!

    Take J.V.'s theories to heart, and all of a sudden you have to believe that certain motherboards sound better than others, some northbridge chips handle data in such a way that it has clearer highs, AMD's L2 cache sounds different than Intel's, and so on, ad nauseum. Once you break it down, and look at it from a more critical and technical perpective, the whole "digital myth" concept falls apart quickly--with the marked exception of clock jitter, and errors related to unbuffered playback.

  5. #175
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Halifax Nova Scotia
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Pretty late to the party but here's my take:

    Back in the early seventies every power amp manufacturer was obsessed with distortion specs (e.g. < .0003 % THD at 1Khz) and the more this race proceeded the worse they sounded. As a lot of folks know today it was due to the measuring technique. A 1Khz oscillator was used to test the THD. Unfortunately this was a steady state single frequency, rather boring program material. The problem came when you attempted to reproduce music, lots of different frequencies at continuously changing levels. When they finally listened to their ears and backed off the steady state distortion specs concentrating instead on increasing overall bandwidth (effectively slew rate). things got better.

    To an earlier poster who mentioned the changing color phenomena from different drives and being laughed off the Photoshop forum -- speculate that's probably true because it's a frequency domain issue. Time domain issues with our eyes have to due with frame rates -- A train passing by does not slowly turn redder because of doppler shift (only in galaxies and stars is that stuff perceptible), the horn however, does get lower.

    To anyone who is skeptical about power cables, etc. -- just put a scope on your AC line (CAREFULLY, it can be lethal), and watch what happens when your fridge, stove, dryer, air conditioning comes on or goes off, let alone all the other junk -- pretty obvious.

    The sound of disk drives -- Don't forget all these signals are RF, supposed to be square waves, but of course have less than infinitessimal rise / fall times, compete with other devices for interrupts, PCI bus time, etc. Once again measuring technique. In non-real time the files may null perfectly, but back to the ears ability to perceive time domain events.


    Finally to the point I'm after:

    When you are measuring audio (which has substantial time and frequency domain components), don't trust your $40,000 analyzer, trust the most complex mixed time / frequency domain measurement instrument on the planet -- the HUMAN EAR

    -- Geoff
    Groove is the subtle control of chaos

  6. #176
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffWaddington
    In non-real time the files may null perfectly, but back to the ears ability to perceive time domain events.
    Data coming from the HD is buffered, time events at the HD level won't make any difference.
    When you are measuring audio (which has substantial time and frequency domain components), don't trust your $40,000 analyzer, trust the most complex mixed time / frequency domain measurement instrument on the planet -- the HUMAN EAR
    Several pairs of human ears in a double blind test, certainly. Any number of human ears in a non-blind test, never.

    As all other human senses, audition is very easy to abuse, and it's well known that people have a tendancy to hear what they want to hear.

    You can hear a difference bewteen two HDs, no doubt. It doesn't mean the difference is actually there.

    I've personally performed some tests with three friends who claimed they could hear the difference between an original pressed CD and a CDR copy. I said OK, let's try it. I changed the discs about 15 times. During the test, the three of them heard a 'huge' difference bewteen both, the copy sounded 'harsh', 'sterile' and 'mudded'.
    The bad news were that I was always playing the original CD, and only pretending to switch with the copy... of course they got mad at me

    My point being: blindly trusting one's senses is foolish. We all have some Jeanne d'Arc in us. And we all want to believe in magic.

  7. #177
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trent Turbington
    Now here's an engineering fact you can take to the bank: A slight increase in emotion and performance from the artist will provide 10 times the benefit over a fancy power cable, rocks on your cd player, or vibration insulated hard drives.
    that is SO true! Bravo!

  8. #178
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2

    Default

    I have been reading this thread with much interest. I'm not an engineer, but a musician and an audiophile who desires to learn more about the DAW and I figure this is a good place to learn. I do know first hand that cables make a HUGE difference in sound quality, as does every individual piece in the chain. If an intereconnect or a speaker cable makes a difference, and I know that to be true, then why wouldn't a power cable? They do. It's in the ears not tech specs or science.

    I can appreciate where Mr. Vestman is coming from and that is the music itself, which is the most important thing. But this is a great discussion!!! Thanks for allowing me to read it!

    That said, anybody know a really good Nuendo engineer?

Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 81415161718

Similar Threads

  1. For Sale: Complete LOGIC PRo 7 DAW
    By cannikin in forum 3D Classifieds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-09-2005, 05:06 PM
  2. You like bad sounds, eh?
    By grekim in forum Microphones and Preamps
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-12-2005, 11:27 PM
  3. FS: Complete Logic 7 System (Lynx2 Unitor MORE!)
    By cannikin in forum 3D Classifieds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-27-2004, 03:35 AM
  4. Pro Tools LE Mix v. Logic Pro Mix
    By TRUN in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-16-2004, 01:05 AM
  5. Logic controller and Logic Audio Platinum
    By Kevin Perry in forum 3D Classifieds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-08-2002, 07:02 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •