Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Daw comparison test?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Daw comparison test? [message #68354 is a reply to message #68353] |
Thu, 18 May 2006 20:56   |
cujo
Messages: 285
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
yip, moving the faders realy does chnge the sound! in any way, it makes it
louder or softer I suppose, I do thing Paris has a blanket over it though,
I am feeling that hardawre processors help. The plate is MUDDDY.
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>Lynn Fuston did one - check his site for DAWSUM sampler:
> http://www.3daudioinc.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_ id/32?osCsid=1e1
>3b5b3af925bec1cc1a24c10e6bae8
>
>One test is at unity gain, the other with matched fader levels. There is
a
>thread on Lynn's forum about it.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>On 5/18/06 8:19 PM, in article 446d2a24@linux, "Edna"
><edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>
>> Seems I remember a while back someone in the group mentioning a DAW shootout
>> done some time ago with folks (BT?) picking their favorites in a blind
>> listening test. Were the results ever published? I'm curious as to
how
>> PARIS came out, as well as a few others.
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Daw comparison test? [message #68377 is a reply to message #68363] |
Fri, 19 May 2006 13:27 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
You'll love this one Lamont:
I'm mixing an R&B/Gospel project in Nuendo (and partially in Sequoia). I
tried Sequoia on a few tunes, even one I started in Nuendo and moved to
Sequoia for the same reason you stated (just couldn't get the sound I was
going for - Destiny's Child, etc). Seq has some great tools for fat and
punchy, but the delay in playback for caching audio, and delay every time I
move a fader (on heavier loaded projects) is too much to bear. Lack of dual
core support is holding this app back - great editing, etc, and it handles
3x the orchestral library as Nuendo, but not when it comes to mixing.
I went back to Nuendo - it takes a different approach, but it's sounding
great (I'll master in Sequoia to get the levels the clients are looking
for). At first I thought it was just that Sequoia really did sound better
on some things and it does handle the main buss differently, but then went
back and compared mixes - now I'm thinking it really had more to do with the
Eqs, comps, etc I was using within Sequoia - nothing comparable in Nuendo.
IMHO, Nuendo doesn't have the headroom for low end (e.g. a limiting
algorithm in some form in the audio engine) - it just clips everything over
0dBFS - Paris and Samp/Seq "soft clip" - so you have to compress it and get
it EQ'd right before hitting the master in Nuendo, and that can be tricky.
It's much easier to let soft clipping handle it since most limiters also
compress the lows and mids with an imbalance of attack/release. Soft
clipping doesn't affect the attack/release at all, so the low end stays
punchy. It does distort, but can be either unnoticeable, or even pleasing
in some cases.
Samplitude has a similar soft clipping approach to Paris', but it still
takes some care to make good use of it. I love a lot about Sequoia, but the
caching has to go (similar to Cool Edit Pro/Audition's approach). I can't
deal with faders that freeze the screen momentarily everytime I tweak it by
0.1dB.
Can we make a request to someone for a "best of" DAW?
Regards,
Dedric
On 5/19/06 9:51 AM, in article 446de96a$1@linux, "LaMont"
<jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
> I'm doing a project starting in Nuendo( R & B, Neo-Soul) with heavey MPC drums
> and all i cn say is that Neundo does not seem to handle agressive Hip Hop
> to well..
>
> When I port the wav files into PT, better results. The when i import those
> same files into Paris..Boom.. !! Nice tranients, full spectrum, big bodied
> AKA Phatt smooth sound..
>
> While I love tracking & Editing in Nuendo, it's handleing of R&B Hip hop
> music leaves a lot to be desired..
>
> Paris is still a gem of a Mixer/Recorder.
> LaMont
> LaMont
>
> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>> Seems I remember a while back someone in the group mentioning a DAW shootout
>> done some time ago with folks (BT?) picking their favorites in a blind
>> listening test. Were the results ever published? I'm curious as to how
>> PARIS came out, as well as a few others.
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Daw comparison test? [message #68392 is a reply to message #68377] |
Fri, 19 May 2006 15:47 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Dedric,
So, you're mixing R&B in Nuendo..Whew!! What a task..
You are right, you have to find that oh-so sweet spot in Nuendo for low end
tracks. I have to admit, Pro-Tools (7) does a much better job at this. But,
Paris just mops the floor in mixing Hip-Hop, R & B music..
Also, I have yet to mix a multi track project in samplitude. I will, i promise..
Take care..LaMont
P.S.. Maybe some DAW manufacturer is in the process of combining "The Best
Features from All the Great DAWS Past & Present" :)
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>You'll love this one Lamont:
>
>I'm mixing an R&B/Gospel project in Nuendo (and partially in Sequoia).
I
>tried Sequoia on a few tunes, even one I started in Nuendo and moved to
>Sequoia for the same reason you stated (just couldn't get the sound I was
>going for - Destiny's Child, etc). Seq has some great tools for fat and
>punchy, but the delay in playback for caching audio, and delay every time
I
>move a fader (on heavier loaded projects) is too much to bear. Lack of
dual
>core support is holding this app back - great editing, etc, and it handles
>3x the orchestral library as Nuendo, but not when it comes to mixing.
>
>I went back to Nuendo - it takes a different approach, but it's sounding
>great (I'll master in Sequoia to get the levels the clients are looking
>for). At first I thought it was just that Sequoia really did sound better
>on some things and it does handle the main buss differently, but then went
>back and compared mixes - now I'm thinking it really had more to do with
the
>Eqs, comps, etc I was using within Sequoia - nothing comparable in Nuendo.
>
>IMHO, Nuendo doesn't have the headroom for low end (e.g. a limiting
>algorithm in some form in the audio engine) - it just clips everything over
>0dBFS - Paris and Samp/Seq "soft clip" - so you have to compress it and
get
>it EQ'd right before hitting the master in Nuendo, and that can be tricky.
>It's much easier to let soft clipping handle it since most limiters also
>compress the lows and mids with an imbalance of attack/release. Soft
>clipping doesn't affect the attack/release at all, so the low end stays
>punchy. It does distort, but can be either unnoticeable, or even pleasing
>in some cases.
>
>Samplitude has a similar soft clipping approach to Paris', but it still
>takes some care to make good use of it. I love a lot about Sequoia, but
the
>caching has to go (similar to Cool Edit Pro/Audition's approach). I can't
>deal with faders that freeze the screen momentarily everytime I tweak it
by
>0.1dB.
>
>Can we make a request to someone for a "best of" DAW?
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>On 5/19/06 9:51 AM, in article 446de96a$1@linux, "LaMont"
><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm doing a project starting in Nuendo( R & B, Neo-Soul) with heavey MPC
drums
>> and all i cn say is that Neundo does not seem to handle agressive Hip
Hop
>> to well..
>>
>> When I port the wav files into PT, better results. The when i import those
>> same files into Paris..Boom.. !! Nice tranients, full spectrum, big bodied
>> AKA Phatt smooth sound..
>>
>> While I love tracking & Editing in Nuendo, it's handleing of R&B Hip hop
>> music leaves a lot to be desired..
>>
>> Paris is still a gem of a Mixer/Recorder.
>> LaMont
>> LaMont
>>
>> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>> Seems I remember a while back someone in the group mentioning a DAW shootout
>>> done some time ago with folks (BT?) picking their favorites in a blind
>>> listening test. Were the results ever published? I'm curious as to
how
>>> PARIS came out, as well as a few others.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Daw comparison test? [message #68394 is a reply to message #68392] |
Fri, 19 May 2006 16:30 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
It mops the floor with whatever gets near it in aggressive pop too, man.
I've still yet to hear anything DAW keep up against Paris with aggressive
pushed / phat mixing techniques.
AA
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:446e4b12$1@linux...
>
> Hey Dedric,
> So, you're mixing R&B in Nuendo..Whew!! What a task..
>
> You are right, you have to find that oh-so sweet spot in Nuendo for low
> end
> tracks. I have to admit, Pro-Tools (7) does a much better job at this.
> But,
> Paris just mops the floor in mixing Hip-Hop, R & B music..
>
> Also, I have yet to mix a multi track project in samplitude. I will, i
> promise..
> Take care..LaMont
>
> P.S.. Maybe some DAW manufacturer is in the process of combining "The Best
> Features from All the Great DAWS Past & Present" :)
>
>
>
>
> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>You'll love this one Lamont:
>>
>>I'm mixing an R&B/Gospel project in Nuendo (and partially in Sequoia).
> I
>>tried Sequoia on a few tunes, even one I started in Nuendo and moved to
>>Sequoia for the same reason you stated (just couldn't get the sound I was
>>going for - Destiny's Child, etc). Seq has some great tools for fat and
>>punchy, but the delay in playback for caching audio, and delay every time
> I
>>move a fader (on heavier loaded projects) is too much to bear. Lack of
> dual
>>core support is holding this app back - great editing, etc, and it handles
>>3x the orchestral library as Nuendo, but not when it comes to mixing.
>>
>>I went back to Nuendo - it takes a different approach, but it's sounding
>>great (I'll master in Sequoia to get the levels the clients are looking
>>for). At first I thought it was just that Sequoia really did sound better
>>on some things and it does handle the main buss differently, but then went
>>back and compared mixes - now I'm thinking it really had more to do with
> the
>>Eqs, comps, etc I was using within Sequoia - nothing comparable in Nuendo.
>>
>>IMHO, Nuendo doesn't have the headroom for low end (e.g. a limiting
>>algorithm in some form in the audio engine) - it just clips everything
>>over
>>0dBFS - Paris and Samp/Seq "soft clip" - so you have to compress it and
> get
>>it EQ'd right before hitting the master in Nuendo, and that can be tricky.
>>It's much easier to let soft clipping handle it since most limiters also
>>compress the lows and mids with an imbalance of attack/release. Soft
>>clipping doesn't affect the attack/release at all, so the low end stays
>>punchy. It does distort, but can be either unnoticeable, or even pleasing
>>in some cases.
>>
>>Samplitude has a similar soft clipping approach to Paris', but it still
>>takes some care to make good use of it. I love a lot about Sequoia, but
> the
>>caching has to go (similar to Cool Edit Pro/Audition's approach). I can't
>>deal with faders that freeze the screen momentarily everytime I tweak it
> by
>>0.1dB.
>>
>>Can we make a request to someone for a "best of" DAW?
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dedric
>>
>>On 5/19/06 9:51 AM, in article 446de96a$1@linux, "LaMont"
>><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I'm doing a project starting in Nuendo( R & B, Neo-Soul) with heavey MPC
> drums
>>> and all i cn say is that Neundo does not seem to handle agressive Hip
> Hop
>>> to well..
>>>
>>> When I port the wav files into PT, better results. The when i import
>>> those
>>> same files into Paris..Boom.. !! Nice tranients, full spectrum, big
>>> bodied
>>> AKA Phatt smooth sound..
>>>
>>> While I love tracking & Editing in Nuendo, it's handleing of R&B Hip hop
>>> music leaves a lot to be desired..
>>>
>>> Paris is still a gem of a Mixer/Recorder.
>>> LaMont
>>> LaMont
>>>
>>> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>>> Seems I remember a while back someone in the group mentioning a DAW
>>>> shootout
>>>> done some time ago with folks (BT?) picking their favorites in a blind
>>>> listening test. Were the results ever published? I'm curious as to
> how
>>>> PARIS came out, as well as a few others.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
|
|
|
|
| Re: Daw comparison test? [message #68509 is a reply to message #68392] |
Mon, 22 May 2006 23:21 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Lamont,
I realized my post probably may not have made sense at the start - I was
referring to how it is interesting that we've come to the same result with
completely different perspectives and experiences, and therein perhaps lies
the answer to why DAWs seem different.
When it all comes down, every app or mixing medium requires a slightly
different approach, but more often that is about workflow - not summing or
other dsp anomalies (which is one thing developers of digital audio try to
avoid). As engineers and producers we all look at problems and solutions
differently (which is what makes this a fun and creative business), but with
digital audio, the results can easily be the same when those differences are
fully understood. That sometimes requires throwing out tradition or learned
approach and figuring out what actually makes up the result we are trying to
achieve. That isn't always as elusive as it once seemed.
To finally summarize a bit of my conclusion on our running conversation on
this, I've been comparing DAWs to find the differences for quite a few years
now. The key isn't trying to push any digital DAW, but finding the tools
that equate to what needs to be achieved. I can create the same result in
Sequoia and Nuendo. Only workflow changes.
As we all know, once you find a way to create a sound, it is no longer a
mystery relegated to a particular piece of gear. Regardless of what
platform a mix is done in, it ends up on CD with the same bit depth, sample
rate, stereo field, etc. The human techniques of mixing are really what it
make the most difference. Certainly different tools (Eqs, comps, limiters,
pres, mics, consoles, etc) all sound different, and will be better choices
for different styles or different needs. But, there isn't a "magic bullet"
- just understanding.
Regards,
Dedric
On 5/19/06 4:47 PM, in article 446e4b12$1@linux, "LaMont"
<jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
> Hey Dedric,
> So, you're mixing R&B in Nuendo..Whew!! What a task..
>
> You are right, you have to find that oh-so sweet spot in Nuendo for low end
> tracks. I have to admit, Pro-Tools (7) does a much better job at this. But,
> Paris just mops the floor in mixing Hip-Hop, R & B music..
>
> Also, I have yet to mix a multi track project in samplitude. I will, i
> promise..
> Take care..LaMont
>
> P.S.. Maybe some DAW manufacturer is in the process of combining "The Best
> Features from All the Great DAWS Past & Present" :)
>
>
>
>
> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>> You'll love this one Lamont:
>>
>> I'm mixing an R&B/Gospel project in Nuendo (and partially in Sequoia).
> I
>> tried Sequoia on a few tunes, even one I started in Nuendo and moved to
>> Sequoia for the same reason you stated (just couldn't get the sound I was
>> going for - Destiny's Child, etc). Seq has some great tools for fat and
>> punchy, but the delay in playback for caching audio, and delay every time
> I
>> move a fader (on heavier loaded projects) is too much to bear. Lack of
> dual
>> core support is holding this app back - great editing, etc, and it handles
>> 3x the orchestral library as Nuendo, but not when it comes to mixing.
>>
>> I went back to Nuendo - it takes a different approach, but it's sounding
>> great (I'll master in Sequoia to get the levels the clients are looking
>> for). At first I thought it was just that Sequoia really did sound better
>> on some things and it does handle the main buss differently, but then went
>> back and compared mixes - now I'm thinking it really had more to do with
> the
>> Eqs, comps, etc I was using within Sequoia - nothing comparable in Nuendo.
>>
>> IMHO, Nuendo doesn't have the headroom for low end (e.g. a limiting
>> algorithm in some form in the audio engine) - it just clips everything over
>> 0dBFS - Paris and Samp/Seq "soft clip" - so you have to compress it and
> get
>> it EQ'd right before hitting the master in Nuendo, and that can be tricky.
>> It's much easier to let soft clipping handle it since most limiters also
>> compress the lows and mids with an imbalance of attack/release. Soft
>> clipping doesn't affect the attack/release at all, so the low end stays
>> punchy. It does distort, but can be either unnoticeable, or even pleasing
>> in some cases.
>>
>> Samplitude has a similar soft clipping approach to Paris', but it still
>> takes some care to make good use of it. I love a lot about Sequoia, but
> the
>> caching has to go (similar to Cool Edit Pro/Audition's approach). I can't
>> deal with faders that freeze the screen momentarily everytime I tweak it
> by
>> 0.1dB.
>>
>> Can we make a request to someone for a "best of" DAW?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> On 5/19/06 9:51 AM, in article 446de96a$1@linux, "LaMont"
>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I'm doing a project starting in Nuendo( R & B, Neo-Soul) with heavey MPC
> drums
>>> and all i cn say is that Neundo does not seem to handle agressive Hip
> Hop
>>> to well..
>>>
>>> When I port the wav files into PT, better results. The when i import those
>>> same files into Paris..Boom.. !! Nice tranients, full spectrum, big bodied
>>> AKA Phatt smooth sound..
>>>
>>> While I love tracking & Editing in Nuendo, it's handleing of R&B Hip hop
>>> music leaves a lot to be desired..
>>>
>>> Paris is still a gem of a Mixer/Recorder.
>>> LaMont
>>> LaMont
>>>
>>> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>>> Seems I remember a while back someone in the group mentioning a DAW
>>>> shootout
>>>> done some time ago with folks (BT?) picking their favorites in a blind
>>>> listening test. Were the results ever published? I'm curious as to
> how
>>>> PARIS came out, as well as a few others.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 02 18:52:09 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01790 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
