POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 2 of 8
Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
KGBJAMIN
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 28
  • Joined: 2003/12/23 22:37:38
  • Location: J-Ville FL
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:13:30 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: danhazer

[That's not what I thought it was.


That's not what I thought it was.

Sample accuacy is obtained through correct syncing of digital devices and use of a good master clock. SONAR has nothing to do with that. How do you figure that SONAR somehow plays into this?

What I thought you were referring to was the idea that SONAR would be able to guarantee that the latency created by the AD/DA process could be accounted for and corrected through some type of compensation routine.

Now I'm confused...


If SONAR doesn't have anything with fidelity then how do you explain the difference between S1 and S4's sound quality???? The application does play a huge role in fidelity and sample accuracy. I notice a distinct difference in clarity and accuracy of my final mixes on my system and I haven't done anything major besides upgrading from S1 to S4. If that was the case then why pay for SONAR when you can do virtually the same things in ACID and it's a hell of a lot cheaper.
#31
danhazer
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2053
  • Joined: 2004/01/08 17:05:18
  • Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:23:38 (permalink)
S1 and S4's sound quality????

My mixes sound the same between the two. There is not a difference.

Dan Monaghan
#32
KGBJAMIN
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 28
  • Joined: 2003/12/23 22:37:38
  • Location: J-Ville FL
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:33:30 (permalink)
You mean to tell me you have S1 and you can't hear any difference in fidelty and clarity in mixes you complete S4?
#33
gdugan
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1118
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 11:24:02
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:35:34 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: danhazer

S1 and S4's sound quality????

My mixes sound the same between the two. There is not a difference.


Gimp.


-Gary

My Soundclick Page
#34
Stich
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 873
  • Joined: 2003/11/11 15:28:25
  • Location: New England
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:35:57 (permalink)
Hard to say. Why would anyone keep S1 after having S2, S3, S4?
I'm not about to reload it to find out.

I mean I have stuff that I recorded in S1 mixed down to CD but without the app loaded It's well hard to say.
#35
danhazer
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2053
  • Joined: 2004/01/08 17:05:18
  • Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:38:25 (permalink)
You mean to tell me you have S1 and you can't hear any difference in fidelty and clarity in mixes you complete S4?

I have mixes going all the way back to PA9 that sound as good as mixes I've done in S4 - better even...

Dan Monaghan
#36
gdugan
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1118
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 11:24:02
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:39:38 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: danhazer

You mean to tell me you have S1 and you can't hear any difference in fidelty and clarity in mixes you complete S4?

I have mixes going all the way back to PA9 that sound as good as mixes I've done in S4 - better even...


Ditto for me.

Gimp.

-Gary

My Soundclick Page
#37
KGBJAMIN
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 28
  • Joined: 2003/12/23 22:37:38
  • Location: J-Ville FL
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:42:00 (permalink)
Your right stich. I still have S2 millingering on my system but I realize I'm a pack-rat. But you have to admit you have noticed an improvement in sound clarity and fidelity over the last 2 years of using SONAR. If I am the only one that has noticed a difference then maybe I have a golden set ears! Seize!
#38
gdugan
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1118
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 11:24:02
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:49:24 (permalink)
I have no doubt that the audio engine in Sonar 4 is superior to previous versions. But honestly, the limiting factor on my mixes has never been PA9 or Sonar or whatever app. And I've never heard a difference just mixing audio tracks. Different/new plugins is a totally different matter.

-Gary

My Soundclick Page
#39
Stich
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 873
  • Joined: 2003/11/11 15:28:25
  • Location: New England
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:49:33 (permalink)
I notice a difference but it's more likely a direct result of my increased mixing prowness & plug in knowledge & the fact that I'm recording at 24bit now.

I really am digging the new PowR Dithering in Sonar4 though!
#40
danhazer
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2053
  • Joined: 2004/01/08 17:05:18
  • Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 13:53:35 (permalink)
I really am digging the new PowR Dithering in Sonar4 though!

POW-R is an advantage for sure, but I never used the native dither prior to its inclusion. I always used Waves IDR - but I don't bother with it anymore; POW-R is just as good, if not better than IDR. I don't claim to have golden ears, either. Although my ears are better than some people who say that they do have the golden ear.

Dan Monaghan
#41
gdugan
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1118
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 11:24:02
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 14:01:38 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: danhazer

I really am digging the new PowR Dithering in Sonar4 though!

POW-R is an advantage for sure, but I never used the native dither prior to its inclusion. I always used Waves IDR - but I don't bother with it anymore; POW-R is just as good, if not better than IDR. I don't claim to have golden ears, either. Although my ears are better than some people who say that they do have the golden ear.


Dan, do you use the waves plugs at all anymore or has UAD-1 eliminated the need to use them?

-Gary

My Soundclick Page
#42
KGBJAMIN
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 28
  • Joined: 2003/12/23 22:37:38
  • Location: J-Ville FL
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 14:02:41 (permalink)
Back to why the subject at hand. The reason why we started talking about fidelity here is because someone was complaining about audio gaps in SONAR vice none in Ableton Live. SONAR's development team's time would probably be better of spent working on improved sample accuracy....
#43
danhazer
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2053
  • Joined: 2004/01/08 17:05:18
  • Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 14:03:46 (permalink)
Dan, do you use the waves plugs at all anymore or has UAD-1 eliminated the need to use them?

I have them and use only a few of them now.

Dan Monaghan
#44
danhazer
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2053
  • Joined: 2004/01/08 17:05:18
  • Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/25 14:05:34 (permalink)
SONAR's development team's time would probably be better of spent working on improved sample accuracy....

It's only that I don't know how they can do that when the sample accuracy is dependent on devices that are connected to your DAW and work with SONAR - like your word clock, etc...

Dan Monaghan
#45
planist
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 883
  • Joined: 2004/01/29 12:07:49
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 07:38:16 (permalink)
sample accuracy and gapless audio are 2 important features.

and perhaps improving one affects the other as well..

cakewalk should make gapless audio THE priority,
also because almost all competition sequenzers offer better engine performance.

My music: http://www.myspace.com/finchhatten
Sonar Feature Requests: http://www.cakewalk.com/forum/tm.asp?m=105821
Sonar Workflow Improvements: http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=1915131
#46
planist
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 883
  • Joined: 2004/01/29 12:07:49
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 07:42:36 (permalink)
i think everyone should try the new
competition products (LIVE, TRACKTION, PODIUM) to see what others bring up.

EG: Arm Track while playback !!!!! :-)

and some new things that are not requested for sonar since 3 or more years...

planist
< Message edited by planist -- 1/26/2005 7:50:29 AM >

My music: http://www.myspace.com/finchhatten
Sonar Feature Requests: http://www.cakewalk.com/forum/tm.asp?m=105821
Sonar Workflow Improvements: http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=1915131
#47
kp
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1496
  • Joined: 2004/01/21 15:22:09
  • Location: London, UK
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 08:49:12 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: planist

sample accuracy and gapless audio are 2 important features.


Since we can't even agree on what "sample accuracy" means, I'd argue with this.


cakewalk should make gapless audio THE priority,


From your perspective. Not from mine by a long way - I can think of maybe 5 or 6 things off the top of my head that I'd rather see before reducing gapping even begins to get a look-in.


also because almost all competition sequenzers offer better engine performance.


WTF does this mean? I mean, I understand the words, but it's so vague as to be useless.
#48
Steve_Karl
Max Output Level: -50 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2534
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 20:53:26
  • Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 09:25:48 (permalink)
Gapless!?!?!?!?! Cakewalk ...... change your advert.
< Message edited by Steve_Karl -- 1/26/2005 9:33:33 AM >
#49
Thomas Campitelli
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 598
  • Joined: 2003/12/29 22:13:08
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 14:18:38 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: kp

ORIGINAL: planist

sample accuracy and gapless audio are 2 important features.


Since we can't even agree on what "sample accuracy" means, I'd argue with this.

I agree with kp here. What is sample accuracy and why is it so important? To my knowledge, no one conducted a double-blind test between audio apps. I'd be very surprised if people could really distinguish between one program or another.
< Message edited by Thomas Campitelli -- 1/26/2005 2:26:08 PM >

Thomas Campitelli
http://www.crysknifeband.com
#50
newfuturevintage
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1848
  • Joined: 2004/11/04 20:35:09
  • Location: o'land, ca
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 14:33:00 (permalink)
What I would like is sample accurate recording. (More important than gapless audio IMO). I would love gapless audio as well.


Agreed. I could even handle having to stop playback for plugin insertion and most clip editing if the trade off were 100% sample accuracy.

Second in demand would be more resiliency against audio dropouts during clip editing, especially at times of low CPU usage.

That said, I would also love a gapless engine. And if it was advertised as such (I don't recall seeing that, but I'll admit to not paying much attention to advertising), gapless is overdue.
#51
newfuturevintage
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1848
  • Joined: 2004/11/04 20:35:09
  • Location: o'land, ca
  • Status: offline
RE: sample accuracy 2005/01/26 14:56:35 (permalink)
I agree with kp here. What is sample accuracy and why is it so important? To my knowledge, no one conducted a double-blind test between audio apps. I'd be very surprised if people could really distinguish between one program or another.


It's not really a matter of being able to distinguish between one program or another with this. It's not a qualitative thing, as it can be measured quantitatively. And it's something that a single app should get right on its own.

I'll offer how I'd like sample accuracy to be defined in practical terms:

I should be able to take a playback stereo pair out of my soundcard and loop back to the input of the same card and record it. The resulting new recording should be in phase with the the old playback track. Were the loop digital and no gain/EQ/other proccessing applied, there should be a 1:1 relationship between all sample values of both tracks at all given sample times.

Why is it important? When not recording with sample accuracy, there's a time discrepancy between newly recorded tracks and the guide tracks they were recorded to. If the difference is small, say under 3 or so ms, it's not so noticable, unless you're bouncing tracks and using offboard gear to do it. Then weird phasiness can result. If it's greater than that, performances begin to get sluggish or rhythmically jumbled.

When recording at higher latency settings (ASIO, monitoring through the soundcard's mixer, not Sonar, ) I've seen the newly recorded tracks about 20ms off in extreme cases. Not good. At lower latency settings, for me, the results seem to be close enough for rock and roll, so I don't sweat it so much.

But if I've got a mix with a couple dozen tracks and plug-ins happening, I may need to raise the latency to avoid stutters. Really still not a problem. Until the client says, OK, so I've got this great idea for a tamborine overdub...then I run the risk of the tamborine being out of sync with the rest of the mix unless I start bypassing or freezing f/x and relowering the latency.

Of course this could be due to poor ASIO implementation on the part of Aardvark...if that's the case, would someone pipe up?
#52
danhazer
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2053
  • Joined: 2004/01/08 17:05:18
  • Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • Status: offline
RE: sample accuracy 2005/01/26 15:07:10 (permalink)
I should be able to take a playback stereo pair out of my soundcard and loop back to the input of the same card and record it. The resulting new recording should be in phase with the the old playback track. Were the loop digital and no gain/EQ/other proccessing applied, there should be a 1:1 relationship between all sample values of both tracks at all given sample times.

How is the audio application at fault for this? Protools admits a 2 ms latency between reality and what is actually recorded and that's becuase of converter latency. The same is true in SONAR, Cubase, Nuendo, etc...

My MOTU 2408 MK 3 has a 102 sample input latency when using ASIO on the loop back test (that just over 2 ms). The only way SONAR could correct this is to get the number of samples in latency (or ms) and then automatically nudge all newly recorded audio back by that amount. Where will SONAR get that information? How will it know? It seems to me that the hardware driver would have to report that information to the host application in order for it to be corrected properly.

What are your thoughts on that?

Thanks,

Dan Monaghan
#53
chelaharper
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 170
  • Joined: 2004/10/20 21:41:10
  • Location: Toronto, Canada
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 15:49:08 (permalink)
what is PDC?

AMD AthlonXP 1.25Ghz
512Ram
2 60GB Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 72000 RPM
RADEON 7000 Serios (Dual Display)
Sonar 4.0.1 Producer Edition
#54
HammerHead
Max Output Level: -62 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1403
  • Joined: 2004/01/07 15:59:53
  • Location: Northern Virginia
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 15:52:17 (permalink)
didn't you guys READ the sonar features web page.


it says sonar is GAPLESS, so if it is NOT GAPLESS
it must be your setup
< Message edited by HammerHead -- 1/26/2005 4:00:05 PM >
#55
danhazer
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2053
  • Joined: 2004/01/08 17:05:18
  • Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 16:15:39 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: HammerHead

didn't you guys READ the sonar features web page.


it says sonar is GAPLESS, so if it is NOT GAPLESS
it must be your setup

Of course what they mean by gapless is that it does "gap less" then the previous versions of SONAR.

Dan Monaghan
#56
gdugan
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1118
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 11:24:02
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 16:20:23 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: chelaharper

what is PDC?


Plugin Delay Compensation: Assuming a plugin correctly reports its delay (latency), Sonar adjusts all the other audio streams so they're in sync with the delayed signal coming from the plugin.

Pretty Dang Cool.
< Message edited by gdugan -- 1/26/2005 1:39:04 PM >

-Gary

My Soundclick Page
#57
mark s
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1140
  • Joined: 2004/01/20 22:08:41
  • Location: Kansas City, Missouri
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 17:36:00 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Thomas Campitelli

To my knowledge, no one conducted a double-blind test between audio apps. I'd be very surprised if people could really distinguish between one program or another.


I though someone found out Nuendo was 20-40% better in a blind test.
#58
Thomas Campitelli
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 598
  • Joined: 2003/12/29 22:13:08
  • Status: offline
RE: sample accuracy 2005/01/26 20:41:14 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: danhazer
How is the audio application at fault for this? Protools admits a 2 ms latency between reality and what is actually recorded and that's becuase of converter latency. The same is true in SONAR, Cubase, Nuendo, etc...

My MOTU 2408 MK 3 has a 102 sample input latency when using ASIO on the loop back test (that just over 2 ms). The only way SONAR could correct this is to get the number of samples in latency (or ms) and then automatically nudge all newly recorded audio back by that amount. Where will SONAR get that information? How will it know? It seems to me that the hardware driver would have to report that information to the host application in order for it to be corrected properly.

What are your thoughts on that?

Thanks,

I think danhazer has an excellent point. There are hardware issues to deal with here. There are going to be delays sending the information out and back that Sonar has no control over.

Thomas Campitelli
http://www.crysknifeband.com
#59
Thomas Campitelli
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 598
  • Joined: 2003/12/29 22:13:08
  • Status: offline
RE: POLL: TESTING GAPLESS PLAYBACK 2005/01/26 20:43:20 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: mark s
I though someone found out Nuendo was 20-40% better in a blind test.


I'm sold.

Thomas Campitelli
http://www.crysknifeband.com
#60
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 2 of 8
Jump to:
© 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1