Do the DAW's sound diffrent?

[przechuy]

Ok i guess i raise one of those tough discussions,but...

As maybe some of You already noticed,i used to praise Reaper.

It is great,cheap DAW with possibilities not worse then those most expensive DAW have,created by a computer software genius (i think creator of winamp,some p2p software etc if i remember well).Everything seems to be perfect in it.

But after a long time with Repaer,I installed once again SONAR 6.

I imported same loops and..damn they sounded diffrent in sonar then they sound in reaper.Without using any effects .Just raw import to both DAW's.

And i must say Sonar seemed to sound better,warmer,more pro,sound was clearer.



And i heard plenty of diffrent oppinions,that DAWs just "do the math",they cant change how your loops and vst sounds,but i am not deaf .It definitelly sounds diffrent.

What are your experiences guys ?
I think i also noticed in past diffrence when tried ableton demo,and compared to cubase,but cant remember my exact thoughts .

[NuEra]

Yes I think so. Even different versions of the same daw can sound different. I have Ableton 5 and something about it always sounded a little wonky, whereas I believe this has been fixed with later versions of Ableton.

[sven hauck]

Yes I think so. Even different versions of the same daw can sound different. I have Ableton 5 and something about it always sounded a little wonky, whereas I believe this has been fixed with later versions of Ableton.

Agreed, I also want to say that between 6 & 7 something changed.

[przechuy]

i am totally in love with sonar ....

for me it is not that easy and intuitive as reaper,but the sound...so warm,never heard my vst's sounding so warm,also oxford dynamics on mastering bus seems to work better then in reaper.Or maybe to be more precise,somehow it seems to be much easier in this environment to tweak vst to get fat sounding effects.Only thing that annoys me after switching to snoar is this midi editing,i mean theoretically it has anything you need,but in practice it is quite messy for me

looks like for a while i will elave reaper,or maybe other way,i will create some midi files -loops in reaper as it is really fast there and easy,and then maybe import it to sonar projects..i spent 4 hours today since 6 pm up to 10 pm and i created one minute long beggining of new track and i am amazed with sound,or maybe my skills raised that much that i am capable to get more out of this daw now after practice with reaper,dunno.

[Edel]

[quote=przechuy]i am totally in love with sonar ....

the sound...so warm,never heard my vst's sounding so warm

Hey PRZECHUY, im curious to what you mean by your vst sounding so warm.
Could you post a .wav audio sample of this and also what vsti you used and if any additional processing was done to it as well. Would be helpful to me and others on the board as well. Thanks

[przechuy]

ok i will upload a cut from what i mentioned. I am bit ashamed as i guess here ,including mr medway,we have at least few guys that produce proffesional ,and i will feel just like a retard in comparation to them,but i will psot it,laer in evening.

And about processing,only processing applied on whole project is oxford dynamics on mastering bus,synth sound is made in pentagon vst ,will upload it bit later in evening when i transfer it from my "producing pc".Ahh,and a sidechaining when kick hits .Thats all.

[admin]

I differ from everyone else as my short answer is: no.

I've gone through the DAW summing grind quest for years trying everyone of them. It started in 2000-1 with Samplitude as I wasn't getting good mixes out of Cubase VST 5/32 compared to my analog mixer. I spent years trawling forums trying to figure out what the secret was. Each time I got my new DAW I'd think 'ah this sounds better now my mixes will be the way I want them to". But soon after I'd do a hardcore a/b test and realize that no it was all in my head. Unless you apply the scientific method to your tests when comparing then don't believe what you think you hear. Confimation biases etc.. can all cloud your judgement.

It's not that hard to do the tests they just take time and you have to be very thorough. At that point there won't be a need to even wonder as your tests will tell you one way or another exactly and without doubt.


There was actually summing test CD that Lynn Fuston did I think back in 2004 that disproved this. Even against analog consoles.

Until you have double blind examples to show other wise then don't believe it.

With Ableton it's more of a special case as the warping can affect quality. I also think that Reason does something when using certain modules, or at least did.

As long as you use DAWs within the bounds of normal operation there is no reason they will sound different apart from stuff like their own built in plugin sound etc.. The precision is so high with the general mixing engines that there's just no point to where they could differ.

DAW sound difference ranks down there with dither, it's just not going to make an appreciable difference in your music. Better to focus your attention elsewere. Use the DAW that you're more effecient, productive, and creative in. That will make a difference. I tested Ableton back in version 6 becuase I heard all these complains about the sound. But I wanted to use it so I made sure the quality was ok. It was..so I use the DAW I prefer, not because of some 'sound difference'.

[admin]

ok i will upload a cut from what i mentioned. I am bit ashamed as i guess here ,including mr medway,we have at least few guys that produce proffesional ,and i will feel just like a retard in comparation to them,but i will psot it,laer in evening.

And about processing,only processing applied on whole project is oxford dynamics on mastering bus,synth sound is made in pentagon vst ,will upload it bit later in evening when i transfer it from my "producing pc".Ahh,and a sidechaining when kick hits .Thats all.

If you do the test make sure you have the same exact settings. Even a small difference in 0.5db can make something sound bigger, warmer, fatter etc.. Even turning your head slightly changes the sound. And knowing which is which mix can result in a bias that makes you 'hear' one sounding better. Always remember our perceptions are easily affected by factors other than the source. This goes for both sight and hearing. Never underestimate your mind's ability to bias things one way or another, or make something seem what it is not.

A large portion of what people perceive as differences in audio material are results of this type of thing.

[przechuy]

You seem to be completely right,i know those arguments ,read some tests already etc that seemed to proovve that daws do sound the same,but actually they sound diffrent to me,and i think i can say it as onlystuff on main buss in reaper recently was oxford dynamics with ssl emu preset,same in sonar,and i thought that the diffrence was really noticeable to me,but i will try maybe test it harder,loading same loops ,or i will import same midi files to reaper and sonar,with same vst instruments and i will export it as wav files to compare

[admin]

And just to continue a bit more:

"And i heard plenty of diffrent oppinions,that DAWs just "do the math",they cant change how your loops and vst sounds,but i am not deaf .It definitelly sounds diffrent."

DAW's are math and everything they do is based on it. So there is always a thread you can follow in how they process this sound. This is to say there's no magic or 'fuzzy' stuff going on. The brain however is not math. You have realize what you 'hear' even if you actually percieve it as being 'there' is not always what the objective reality is throwing out at you.

If someone sees an illusion, like a mirage, to them it is there, they see it. But it doesn't actually exist. This type of thing happens with audio too. And this is why testing is necessary, to figure out if what you think you are hearing is actually repeatbale and present in the real world.

I think that's a major concept a lot of people forget when it comes to audio. There isn't always a 1:1 connect between what is coming out the speakers and what the mind hears. I do it all the time myself when I turn a knob, hear a change only to realize the plugin was off. In a sense I 'heard' the change and even say 'ok this sounds better now' only to realize it wasn't doing anything.

There's an old trick for producers in big studios meddling with the sound engineers. They would install a knob that did nothing yet when the producer asked for some change, theyd say 'hey turn that knob and it will do what you want etc...'. The producer would change it and say 'ya sounds great'. That way the engineers could go about thier business and not have they mix being changed by a label executive.

In your case it's possible that there is a difference but it's probably down to either the above, different settings, or perhaps a way the DAW's handle things differently but in a way that when calibrated they will sound the same. For instance pan law used to be responsible for people thinking Cubase and Pro Tools sounded different. They did sound different but it was due to the pan law setting which once accounted for made them sound the same.

My point is once all of these factors are accounted for a same sounding mix on all current DAWs will be possible.