BluerecordingStudios
Two questions: Did you discovered better sound than from previous versions of Sonar?
If there is better sound, I wouldn't have been able to tell. The last 96/24 projects I did were acoustical classical music. I tracked the music in a Pro Tools studio, but then exported the files and used SONAR for the editing and mixing because it sounded better. This project was a hard rock band with a feed off the front of house mixer.
I'm of the belief that the sound quality occurs in the converters. Once the encoded audio gets into a double-precision 64-bit engine, not a lot can go wrong with it.
Why don't you use Sonar's mp3 function?
The
Sonnox Fraunhofer Pro Codec costs almost as much as Platinum, and is a thing of beauty. You can encode into multiple streams
simultaneously like AAC, MP3, various lossless algorithms, etc., but even more importantly, you can play through it in real time to audition different conversion processes and rates, and A/B with the source material, as well as listen only to the difference between the source and encoded material. It also compensates automatically for the fact that conversions can often result in signals that go over 0. It's the
ne plus ultra of data compression products AFAIC; there's no comparison to any other MP3 conversion utility I've seen in any other program, including high-level digital audio editors. It's the Platinum of MP3 converters