Check this out : so what you think

http://www.mix-buss.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=131

The end of the thread is that the summing of cubase and nuendo is superior so anybody have made the test :

Sonar vs other daws mixing routing sound ?

"You will learn far more from completing a project than reading old forum threads."

Thks for the advise even if i just went platnum this years !


Just to be serious i was just lookin for an anaolg summing solution and on my top list it was the neve 8816 so i decided to google analog summin and it was one of the reults !

So curious like i am i read and was wondering if it really excists a different in sounds between daws !!
That's it ! i know it's old that's why i'm asking cakewalkers right ow cause most of them use two or more daws !!

Thks anyway for your answer !

And when I moved up from my Delta44 to my current Emu1212M (with the Pro Tools converter chips) and ditched my Mackie 1202 for a Presonus Central Station, everything improved sonically by at least one level of clarity and quality. You make a good point, though about being accustomed to what you have. It's only when compared against something else that you can really tell which is more appealing to your ears.

Thks guyz for sharing .....

In fact i was a long time sonar forum reader and that was Jose dat tell me to become an active member , and no i will no change my avatar !

Still keeping mine !!

Well let's say ....mmmmm no

ORIGINAL: Paul Russell

Sonar 8 sounds significantly better than previous versions.

Really ? i didn't noticed a difference with my S6

Was more on a comparaison with otha brands ...

ORIGINAL: Paul Russell

Compared to the skills of the user, the difference is negligible.
Sonar 8 sounds significantly better than previous versions.

Does it sound 20-40% better though?

Folks these days dont listen right! cant hear no difference is for KRK speaker owners i guess. "Cant hear no difference" . what a shame. THERE ARE BIG _BIIIG differences in audioquality of the DAWS.
First 64 Bit allways calculates more sound--so go figure-
Nuendo for example had a slightly worse audioengine 3 years ago then now. Nuendo has a very good soundquality!
cubase while mixing all tracks together ,will loose soundquality compared to the original mix! SONAR WILL NOT LOOSE SOUNDQUALITY after bouncing!!!!! It sounds just like the original mix!!!! AWESOME!!!!!!!!!! 87566464334348909 STARS!!!!!
Logic sounds very flat when more then 20 tracks are used, though it has some punch. All my trax sound much better produced on Sonar then on Cubase. Its all in the mix----- AND i CAN let them tracks clip in SONAR like a cow on herbs! SONAR has some kind of limmiter in the output , which lets you run on very high trackvolumes...AMAZING again!

Intel DX58SO, i7 920, 6GB RAM, MOTU ultralite, Vista ult., Sonar 8 Prod., SPL volume 2, Dynaudio BM5A, Rapture

"You will learn far more from completing a project than reading old forum threads."

Thks for the advise even if i just went platnum this years !


Just to be serious i was just lookin for an anaolg summing solution and on my top list it was the neve 8816 so i decided to google analog summin and it was one of the reults !

So curious like i am i read and was wondering if it really excists a different in sounds between daws !!
That's it ! i know it's old that's why i'm asking cakewalkers right ow cause most of them use two or more daws !!

Thks anyway for your answer !

Hello,

I've used (on the Macs ranging from Mac II's to G3's using DigiDesign hardware) SoundDesigner, Deck II, ProTools, Alchemy, Spark and Peak and (on the PC from P133 to Dual Core Athlon’s using Echo Gina and Delta 1010), CubaseVST24, 32, SX, Sonar (back to when it was wincake.exe), SoundForge and Wavelab. I do not hear any sound difference between Mac and PC and different software packages. So I would say there is no difference and if you can hear a difference it's not enough to affect the success of the project.

I did notice a big difference when I switched from the Echo Gina (purchased around 1998, which I loved) to the M-Audio Delta 1010. It was really a noticeable difference of improved clarity of the sound. I always thought the Gina sounded wonderful (much more "open" than its predecessor, a Forstex 8 track reel-to-reel recorder) but when I switch to the 1010 it was, "Whoa, this sounds much "better." Another change that affected the sound in my studio was the demise of my Behringer 8 bus mixer to be replaced with a Mackie 4 bus. It was, "Whoa, the Behringer was definitely muddying things up. The change to the Mackie was again, a noticeable improvement.

I think at the quality level of the 1010 and the Mackie mixer it would be difficult to achieve the same degree of improvement by trading up to a more expensive mixer and interface. At this point I would say that the improvements I would gain would not affect the success of the end product.

Listening to your music on your SoundClick page, I would say that you already have the capability and the productions values to do top level stuff. I wouldn't invest in any more gear, I would invest in marketing. My humble opinion.

GK

ORIGINAL: cryptexmarble

even though SONAR has twelve million two thousandand three bugs, i love it cause of its superrior soundquality--
My older projects made on RME and Cubase 4 sound much duller less shiny , less airy and cubase just sounds worse -----
Mixes in SONAR sound like a DREAM!!!!!

Intel DX58SO , i7920, 6GB RAM, MOTU ULTRALITE , SPL volume 2, Dynaudio BM5A,VISTA ult., SOnar 8 prod

RME + Cubase 4 vs MOTU + Sonar 8

I don't think the setting for a clean and fair comparaison is here , and witch version of cubase cause sx is known to send better than cubase studio ...

I do think that RME has a superiour sonic quality than your Motu !

Well considerin my hear , i'm quite confident on my listenening skill and my set up (Adamp P11A + Sub and genelec 8020 + sub , beyerdynamics dt 990 pro)

And the only difference i noticed was when i changed from my emu 1616 m to my Fireface 400

On the paper paper sonar is superior because of the standard 32 bit floating and the high quality difthering and the 64 engine of course.....so if you want to make a test just take like 10 sounds track use of course the same hardware , no plugin just raw files , bounce it at 24 bits bought and then open it in wahtever and make an phase cancel test !

I didn't make it cuase i don't have cubase sx or anything else , that's why i'm posting this thread !

This is what i'm talkin bout !
Anyway i'm sonar to the bone ! because of so many otha stuff....

Ok don't want to kill the topic and Mike !

This is not the one on "the prince of Bel air"

Comon !!

This is not the one on Men in Black !

I do not agree with that. The summing of Sonar "can" be called superrior , because it actualy is.
And the limmiting function of Sonars mixer is cool .....You cant make it better with earth given present technology.
Thanks.

ORIGINAL: Zo

http://www.mix-buss.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=131

The end of the thread is that the summing of cubase and nuendo is superior so anybody have made the test :

Sonar vs other daws mixing routing sound ?

ORIGINAL: cryptexmarble

i have compared the bounces of Cubase and SOnar ---- Cubase does not sound the same!!!!

In Cubase when the mix gets bounced , it will make it sound a little duller and less precise.
When i bounce my mix in Sonar with 64Bit , i can hear no difference between the mix and the bounce ---- SO ????????????

I know the things i know , even if its nothing at all.



INTEL DX58SO , DYNAUDIO BM5A, SPL VOLUME 2, MOTU ultralite, Sonar 8 prod.

I don't believe a mix on two separate DAWs can be mixed so precisely that they have identical settings that in fact effect the mix in the same exact way. You need to do a null test of a sine wave or a square wave. They will need to be set to the exact same settings with no FX for any conclusions to be made. Even then I would not bet my life on the results. I love it when anyone uses the "golden ears" approach to any discussion on the quality of audio. It means "I know what I know no matter how dumb it is".