@Chregg

The project I used was 96khz/32bit.

I highlighted a 20 second portion of the project and exported it at 96kHz/32bit with the 64bit Engine On and again with it off. No dithering either time. I ended up with two 96kHz/32bit undithered .wav files.

I made sure the project was set to import at original bit depth, disabled the Pro Channel and FX Bin on the master bus, imported both wav's back in to the project and routed them to the master bus, then reversed the phase on one of the tracks.

I am currently demoing the X1 Producer.  At first I was quite taken with the ProChannel and other "Producer exclusive" effects, but after some experimentation I found that I can achieve similar results with the plug-ins already in my arsenal.  And ProChannel takes up a lot of screen real estate.

Also it seemed like maybe the unprocessed audio in Producer sounds better than in my previous software, (Guitar Tracks 3) but I didn't know whether this is due to the 64 bit engine, or perhaps even a placebo effect.

The PC takes up the same real estate as the Track Inspector and far less than the equivalent VSTs. True, the PC can be duplicated with various VSTs, however it is a low CPU user and can be employed on multiple channels and buses.

To me its the single best reason to get X1 Producer.

omtayslick


I am currently demoing the X1 Producer.  At first I was quite taken with the ProChannel and other "Producer exclusive" effects, but after some experimentation I found that I can achieve similar results with the plug-ins already in my arsenal.  And ProChannel takes up a lot of screen real estate.

Also it seemed like maybe the unprocessed audio in Producer sounds better than in my previous software, (Guitar Tracks 3) but I didn't know whether this is due to the 64 bit engine, or perhaps even a placebo effect.

Yes you can achieve similar results with other VST, but what I like best with the prochannel is the workflow "boost", and if you want to hide it in track view, just press "I".

John


The PC takes up the same real estate as the Track Inspector and far less than the equivalent VSTs. True, the PC can be duplicated with various VSTs, however it is a low CPU user and can be employed on multiple channels and buses.

To me its the single best reason to get X1 Producer.

John types faster than me and uses better words than me

omtayslick

I am currently demoing the X1 Producer.  At first I was quite taken with the ProChannel and other "Producer exclusive" effects, but after some experimentation I found that I can achieve similar results with the plug-ins already in my arsenal.  And ProChannel takes up a lot of screen real estate.

Quite true. If you already have a set of plug-in's you are familiar with and are happy with the way they sound, you don't need the Pro Channel. Not saying there is anything wrong with the Pro Channel, but there are some down sides as well as up sides to it as you've seen.There's a lot of us who would like the option to not install it. The only plug-in's I use, besides a handful of free ones, are the ones that come with the Producer Edition of Sonar, so I have no choice.

Also it seemed like maybe the unprocessed audio in Producer sounds better than in my previous software, (Guitar Tracks 3) but I didn't know whether this is due to the 64 bit engine, or perhaps even a placebo effect.

There should be no difference at all on dry tracks with or without the 64bit Engine On. Well ... I stand corrected ... I just did a null test on dry tracks with and without the 64bit engine on. I got -121.9db of sound when I did the null test.

It stands to reason that a 64-bit audio engine is going to better than a 32-bit engine.

Unfortunately, there are many things in this business that seem entirely reasonable, but just ain't so. 


I would challenge anyone to create a musical snippit, exported with and without the 64-bit option, that even golden ears could distinguish in a blind test. That includes you, Freddie. Post two clips that differ only in whether or not the 64-bit option was enabled, and see if anyone can identify them in a blind ABX.


But it's not as though the option does nothing at all! Here's what the 64-bit export option does for you, in a practical sense: you get to use double the RAM when you export.

bitflipper

It stands to reason that a 64-bit audio engine is going to better than a 32-bit engine.

Unfortunately, there are many things in this business that seem entirely reasonable, but just ain't so. 


I would challenge anyone to create a musical snippit, exported with and without the 64-bit option, that even golden ears could distinguish in a blind test. That includes you, Freddie. Post two clips that differ only in whether or not the 64-bit option was enabled, and see if anyone can identify them in a blind ABX.


But it's not as though the option does nothing at all! Here's what the 64-bit export option does for you, in a practical sense: you get to use double the RAM when you export.

I agree with you bitflipper regarding the test to distinguish the difference.  But I stand by my statement that you quoted above, somewhat out of context.

Mathematically there is no denying that a 64-bit engine is going to more accurately process the algorithms that occur within your DAW software over a 32-bit engine (the boundary case scenario being that there's not enough information to warrant a numerical difference, in which case the results would be identical).

I know you know that because I can tell you are a smart bloke.  You picked up on my inference that the audio would sound better whereas the point I was trying to make was that there is a difference and, whether you can hear it or not, why worry about it if your system can handle it.  

The only time I think you should be concerned about whether there really is a difference is if your system is not able to cope, in which case drop down to 32-bit and you probably won't notice anyway.

So, in summary...
If you have better gear or better options that don't impact your workflow by using them, then, well, use them.  Regardless if you can really tell if there's a difference.  

Much like I suggested...

And no I'm not in movies...unless you count real life...which would beat most of the recycled-rehashes Hollow-wood is selling to us...

One of the thing's I've noticed is how much "noise" gets added to the creative process by our technology, and I'm not talking about "audible" stuff here...

It seems like the tools we have (which are incredibly powerful for probably ANYONE on this forum) manage to create an "distraction gravity" that consumes and derails our intent and purpose...

I have heard amazing stuff recorded on a PIII using a soundblaster and a cheap Radio-shirk microphone into Fruity-loops...because the guy simply was not smart enough to log onto a forum and ask technical questions...

I'm not opposed to what takes place here...it just seems like very little happens in way of creative discovery process because we all seem a little distracted by our gear and technology lust...your's truly included...

64 bit vs. 32 bit mix engines...not withstanding...

it just seems like very little happens in way of creative discovery process because we all seem a little distracted by our gear and technology lust

 
Ain't that the truth...  
 
Intellectual "fun" during these discussions not withstanding.