Jarsve

Jeff Evans
Summing engine sounds great.. Their stock plugins are great.  Once you get to know them they easily slip into your go to choices when mixing.  Back that up with a good selection of well chosen third party plugins and you are in a very strong position.  Panning sounds nice in Studio One.  As soon as you move it, the image seems to appear quickly. 
 
You cannot have a DAW that has no bottom end!  It is a ludicrous statement.  In my setup Studio One simply faithfully reproduces in playback exactly what I am sending it.  I work with many synths too as well as kick drums and bass guitars etc.. I would notice pretty quick if the low end of the system was wrong.  They sound so fat and floor shaking in real life when I play them through the synth mixer and I am monitoring it directly.  On playback Studio One sounds exactly the same here for me anyway.  
 
The built in console emulation is very good and if you grab the Mix engine plugin add on such as the CTC-1 console emulator you get a choice of 3 amazing sounding consoles. The approach they have taken with console emulation is very good and it can sound great.  They have modelled basically the Neve and SSL sound and given you a custom option which is more like a very transparent mastering type console. The crosstalk options are also excellent.  Mixer and tape machine crosstalk can be dialled in.  It all helps to glue a mix real nice. 

It is not the base bottom end I talk about, but the dynamic bottom. it seems like it has cleaned much of warmth and ambience that makes the sound great. It sounds Sterile and not musical in my ears. Like it is hard to make the sound because of the lack of depth. You only hear the peak sound. Not what’s underneath.

Will be a relatively simple exercise for you to demonstrate this by setting up identical projects in each DAW and combining them out of phase. This "magic" that you perceive as lacking in S1 but present in Sonar should reveal itself very clearly as the difference, and we can confirm one way or the other.

sharke
Aside from DAW's whose whole point is to add a particular sound to a mix (i.e. Mixbus), nobody has ever been able to demonstrate conclusively that one DAW sounds different to another. All we ever have is subjective opinions (and we all know how unreliable they can be when it comes to judging two pieces of audio) and people claiming to have done tests and that they'll post the results "in due course" (but they never do). 
 

Greetings sharke,
 
If this is directed at me, let me point out that I have never made such claims before. I have always stayed away from those debates in the past. It wasn't until this terrible news that I started to seriously look at other DAWs. Since this is a part of my living I take it very seriously so I want to make sure I have the best tools  I can get.
 
Now that I have made that claim, you can absolutely be sure I will follow through with my tests and show them. I am sorry I cannot drop everything instantly and get right on this. I am a father, a husband, an IT worker and an audio engineer. I am just a little bit busy.
 
Now to the Studio One faithful, I get it. I understand when some outsider makes a claim that your DAW isn't the king on everything, it makes you want to come to it's defense. I know, because that was me with SONAR. I totally get it.
 
But please understand that I am joining in with Studio One. I am making it my DAW of the future. Since I don't have the built-in bias for it, I am coming in with a completely open mind. I saw or heard something that was a bit concerning and I just want to make sure that if there is an issue, that it gets addressed. That is my only motivation. I am now a licensed Studio One 3 Professional user now. Let's make it a great DAW.
 
And also know this. I am no saying Studio One sucks by any means. In fact I tried several DAWs and chose Studio One over all of them. I know great mixes can be made on it. I know there is a nice efficient workflow with it. I do hope for some other SONAR features to be implemented, but for now it is very nice. Everyone here that? I said Studio One is very nice. Do not make an enemy out me. I just want it to be as best as it can be. If you are saying it cannot be improved at all ever, you are not doing any great service to Studio One.
 
I will run my tests again and see what comes of it. I WILL post my findings/results/ etc... If my tests prove nothing than so be it. I will accept that. If there is something... lets find out what it is and if there is something that can be done about it.

This forum descends into hostility far too easily. I have seen Sharke be snarky and this was not one of those times. He was just offering a practical way to see if it's perception or there is a measurable difference.

Sylvan

sharke
Aside from DAW's whose whole point is to add a particular sound to a mix (i.e. Mixbus), nobody has ever been able to demonstrate conclusively that one DAW sounds different to another. All we ever have is subjective opinions (and we all know how unreliable they can be when it comes to judging two pieces of audio) and people claiming to have done tests and that they'll post the results "in due course" (but they never do). 
 

Greetings sharke,
 
If this is directed at me, let me point out that I have never made such claims before. I have always stayed away from those debates in the past. It wasn't until this terrible news that I started to seriously look at other DAWs. Since this is a part of my living I take it very seriously so I want to make sure I have the best tools  I can get.
 
Now that I have made that claim, you can absolutely be sure I will follow through with my tests and show them. I am sorry I cannot drop everything instantly and get right on this. I am a father, a husband, an IT worker and an audio engineer. I am just a little bit busy.
 
Now to the Studio One faithful, I get it. I understand when some outsider makes a claim that your DAW isn't the king on everything, it makes you want to come to it's defense. I know, because that was me with SONAR. I totally get it.
 
But please understand that I am joining in with Studio One. I am making it my DAW of the future. Since I don't have the built-in bias for it, I am coming in with a completely open mind. I saw or heard something that was a bit concerning and I just want to make sure that if there is an issue, that it gets addressed. That is my only motivation. I am now a licensed Studio One 3 Professional user now. Let's make it a great DAW.
 
And also know this. I am no saying Studio One sucks by any means. In fact I tried several DAWs and chose Studio One over all of them. I know great mixes can be made on it. I know there is a nice efficient workflow with it. I do hope for some other SONAR features to be implemented, but for now it is very nice. Everyone here that? I said Studio One is very nice. Do not make an enemy out me. I just want it to be as best as it can be. If you are saying it cannot be improved at all ever, you are not doing any great service to Studio One.
 
I will run my tests again and see what comes of it. I WILL post my findings/results/ etc... If my tests prove nothing than so be it. I will accept that. If there is something... lets find out what it is and if there is something that can be done about it.

I think you're overreacting a little and taking it too personally. All I'm saying is that these "DAW x doesn't sound as good as DAW y" claims are made very frequently, yet nobody has been able to substantiate them any further on paper. It's not that I expect you to do it straight away, it's just that from experience I know that what I won't be seeing is a set of test results showing how S1 processes basic audio differently from Sonar, because I don't think that is the case at all. Like I said, if there were differences then the DAW manufacturers would be using them in their marketing. Given that DAW's are 100% designed to process audio, don't you think that the ability to process audio better than the competition would be a HUGE selling point?

I think what happens is that people's brains expect to hear something different when they fire up a new audio program after having been used to another one for so long. When the brain expects to hear something different, oftentimes it will kid itself that it does even when it doesn't. I believe that so much as looking at a GUI can affect our auditory perceptions. Oftentimes when I turn my screen off and listen to a project, I notice things about the sound that I didn't notice when watching the project scroll past me on the screen. Closing your eyes can make a difference too. So if the visual difference of not looking at a DAW versus looking at one can affect one's perception of audio, maybe looking at two different DAW's can affect our perception also.

If you manage to find a quantifiable way in which S1 sounds different to Sonar, I think it will be huge news across the audio world.

Sylvan

sharke
Aside from DAW's whose whole point is to add a particular sound to a mix (i.e. Mixbus), nobody has ever been able to demonstrate conclusively that one DAW sounds different to another. All we ever have is subjective opinions (and we all know how unreliable they can be when it comes to judging two pieces of audio) and people claiming to have done tests and that they'll post the results "in due course" (but they never do). 
 

Greetings sharke,
 
If this is directed at me, let me point out that I have never made such claims before. I have always stayed away from those debates in the past. It wasn't until this terrible news that I started to seriously look at other DAWs. Since this is a part of my living I take it very seriously so I want to make sure I have the best tools  I can get.
 
Now that I have made that claim, you can absolutely be sure I will follow through with my tests and show them. I am sorry I cannot drop everything instantly and get right on this. I am a father, a husband, an IT worker and an audio engineer. I am just a little bit busy.
 
Now to the Studio One faithful, I get it. I understand when some outsider makes a claim that your DAW isn't the king on everything, it makes you want to come to it's defense. I know, because that was me with SONAR. I totally get it.
 
But please understand that I am joining in with Studio One. I am making it my DAW of the future. Since I don't have the built-in bias for it, I am coming in with a completely open mind. I saw or heard something that was a bit concerning and I just want to make sure that if there is an issue, that it gets addressed. That is my only motivation. I am now a licensed Studio One 3 Professional user now. Let's make it a great DAW.
 
And also know this. I am no saying Studio One sucks by any means. In fact I tried several DAWs and chose Studio One over all of them. I know great mixes can be made on it. I know there is a nice efficient workflow with it. I do hope for some other SONAR features to be implemented, but for now it is very nice. Everyone here that? I said Studio One is very nice. Do not make an enemy out me. I just want it to be as best as it can be. If you are saying it cannot be improved at all ever, you are not doing any great service to Studio One.
 
I will run my tests again and see what comes of it. I WILL post my findings/results/ etc... If my tests prove nothing than so be it. I will accept that. If there is something... lets find out what it is and if there is something that can be done about it.

There is nothing that could be done about it I am sorry to say. You will not change Sonar and you will not change Studio One. If you hear a difference in S1, you will adjust for it with your plugs and ears. There really is no problem with the way S1 sounds. Really. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Ha ha, unfortunately Matron Landslide, your graphic is true in terms of future development. Tis a sad thing, but I actually chuckled when I saw your tree...ha ha. 

Just giving you my two cents.  If the mix sounds different than you need to re adjust your mix.  Could be as simple as too much COMP on an important track or the master.  I am still working on a very complex project that I started in SONAR, then ported over to S1.... Just the opposite with me, the project sounds better in S1 than in SONAR.
 
But here is the kicker.... the project in SONAR was eating 25% about CPU. The S1 project (same number of tracks and same plugs) is running at 14-15%.  I have had ZERO dropouts where the engine would stop in SONAR.  I couldn't even LOOP a section of a song in SONAR for comping unless I deactivated the plugins in the FX bin.  So, it kind of defeated the comp looping idea since the tracks were now simply native with no PLUGINs running.  Not only do I have have to disable the plugs in S1, I can remove and insert plugins while the track is playing.  This was an instant crash in SONAR.  Let's just say the S1 is a lot more stable than SONAR.  Who woulda thunk it?  I have been a user of CAKE for about 30 years now and maybe this shutter was "a blessing in disguise". 
 
Yeah, the GUI doesn't look as nice or is it as customizable as SPLAT but now that I have about 15 hours under my belt, practically started from scratch, I am seeing how the workflow has a better design than I thought it did. There are still some quirks I need to get used to and I have a long way to go before I make my final verdict, but it is very, very promising so far.
 
The thing I miss most though, is the TRACK ICON feature in Console View.  I am older, my eyes are failing and trying to read the scribble field on the tracks is tough on me, was easier to see a drum kit or a guitar or a keyboard to locate a track.  This doesn't seem like big deal and perhaps we will see this down the road with S1.

The only place I have ever come across the audio engine dropping out is with SONAR, if it wasn't for SONAR  I wouldn't even know about the audio engine dropping out. You can even change your audio interface buffer settings with Studio One open and it keeps on trucking (as does REAPER) do that in SONAR and it's drop out time every time. Ever wonder why there was a designated button to restart the audio engine in SONAR? I did, and I know why.
 
As to the sound, don't know if I can explain it, but anyway, what I found is using exactly the same settings things just sounded louder in SONAR (and REAPER) without adjusting anything external or internal to match it, to put it another way, if I recorded a guitar track, all faders at zero etc, same plugs and settings, no changes anywhere to monitoring level or anything, playing back SONAR (and REAPER) would be noticeably louder than Studio One, but if you mixdown there is no difference.
 
I can get a far better sound with Studio One, which I couldn't match with SONAR or REAPER no matter what I tried, and it's because of the Mix Engine Fx in Studio One, the Console shapper, and even better (much better) if you buy CTC-1 Pro Console Shapper, I find that to be awesome. Not to be confused with SONARs Pro Chennel as a lot of people do, they are nothing alike, Pro Channel is just a glorified FX bin sitting on top as it were, Mix Engine Fx are applied deep within the audio/summing engine of Studio One, not just sitting on top as normal Fx, it's pretty awesome when you get your head around it, I don't ever not use it. Softube also make a Tape emulation which is Mix Engine Fx compatible and is pretty awesome. It is rumored that other developers are making Mix Engine Fx plugins, but I don't think any others have surfaced yet, but I am more than happy with CTC-1 Pro and Softubes Tape, awesome stuff.
 

If somebody know how the equivalent of freeze a synth from a synth rack ...would be exellnt ...i know the command to offline a track witch commit the ausio and bypass fx that you can roll back ( i hate the implemntation since when you commit the fx dissapear , great to share projects but to know what was on the track you have to make it rea ime again ...


Another question is when you modify a track in songs view and it can be upadtesd in projects view by bouncing it again ´ is there a way to control that process like choosing the bus to use for bounce (to skip Arc in my case and bounce a specific bus ?

Guyz be sure to play with macros ...it s making it super efficient ....