Audio Engine Differences...vXL2.2 & v4

People...

Remember when I used to **** in here about how much I disliked SONAR4's graphic interface & sluggish operation...& vowed only to use it for mixdown, due to the advancements in the audio engine & summing architecture?

Well, I'm still of the same mindset...

but now I'm wondering:

How advanced were those advancements ???

Reason I ask?

I'm working on my final project mixes, prior to a scheduled mastering session...I'll get a mix to just where it needs to be (in XL2.2), kick it over to SONAR4; & either export the entire mix as a 24-Bit .wav...or isolate key track groups; & export those as 24-Bit stems (submixes.)

(most of the projects are 16-Bit...& are BTD'd at 24.)

Certain tracks always sound different in SONAR4...specifically, most of my Lead Guitars. Seems like my guitars are always 1.5dB to 3dB lower in level when bounced out of v4.

For comparison, I bounced using identical methods out of v2...& the guitars were all louder !

The only thing I could find which may be a contributing factor is the fact that the guitars in question are all processed via UAD-1 plug-ins, mostly Pultec Pro...to brighten up the EQ a little bit.

So...what is different about the audio architecture in SONAR4; & why am I getting significant differences in level? Plug-in processing didn't change to the degree whereby it would decrease track levels, did it? I don't think it's bouncing 16-Bit projects to 24-Bit files either...that only captures more of the 32-Bit internal processing across the multitrack section...but v2 also operates via 32-Bit.

One thing I did notice:

For playback in SONAR4...those tracks SOUND lower in volume...so I’m more or less getting what I'm hearing.

Anybody have any insight on this?

Thanks,

mark4man

I have no idea what's going on in the mix engines but have a few questions that may or may not relate.
It looks like you may be doing most of the relevant processing in the ver 2 stage (eg, dynamics, levels etc?). Is that happening internally (but just on 16 bit source files) at 24bit? Then how do you move over to ver 4? By opening the mix session in 4, save and convert, then export or BTD the final? I was also wondering if the UAD was used in both sessions?
I would assume that if v4's was any better, you'd want to mix there to pick up the advantages (if any) in that stage of it.
Thanks
Wayne

Wayne...

Thanks.

Both v2.2 & v4 are 32-Bit (FP) at the interconnect (between plugs & busses)...so that should be the same, right? (i.e., plug-in processing is of equal capacity in both apps.)

I don't save/convert the project in SONAR4...I just open it & bounce selected tracks.

UAD-1 plug settings stay w/ the project; & there's no difference in the project. I just open the project in v4 & BTD.

It's weird...that there would be track "level" differences. Sound...maybe, but level?...I don't know.

I thought at first it may be that v4 has the universal bus architecture, but everything in the problem projects is on A (1-2)...no aux, no routing.

weird.

mark4man

Remember when I used to **** in here about how much I disliked SONAR4's graphic interface & sluggish operation

You can't please all the people all the time. I think you'll find that many Sonar users disagree with you on this.

Certain tracks always sound different in SONAR4...specifically, most of my Lead Guitars. Seems like my guitars are always 1.5dB to 3dB lower in level when bounced out of v4.

Two possibilities I can think of...

a) Pan Law. Sonar 2.2 does not have any options here, but Sonar 4 does.

b) Track Interleave. I think this is most likely. Assuming pan laws are consistent, a mono track can change in volume by up to 3db if its interleave is changed. I also believe that Sonar 4's track interleave control works a bit differently than Sonar 2.2's... affecting the result before and after the FX bin differently.

-S

Scott, what is "track interleave"?...................JDW

The "bow-tie" icon in the track listing (left hand side) of the Track view. As a full "bow-tie" you get a stereo track, with a "half-bow-tie" you get a mono track.

The difference is that in Sonar v4 this actually sets the track interleave as opposed to just passing the value to the plugins, ie. whether it is a stereo or mono track. With Sonar v4 this information is also passed to the audio engine itself which then uses the information to determine how load the file should be.

My bass player had an issue when he was bouncing stuff to clips it looked like it was doubling in size. Resetting the track interleave to be MONO not STEREO, (half-bow-tie not full-bow-tie), fixed the problem.

Ciao,

Q.

ORIGINAL: mark4man
I don't save/convert the project in SONAR4...I just open it & bounce selected tracks.

Sorry I'm being thick but I couldn't tell if you were importing the tracks into v4 or just opening the whole project there. Sounds like the latter of the two, but it looks like the level differences are accounted for.
Wayne

The "bow-tie" icon in the track listing (left hand side) of the Track view. As a full "bow-tie" you get a stereo track, with a "half-bow-tie" you get a mono track

So it is just a terminology thing. Yea, I track at half Bow-tie (mono) as I like to put things where I want in a mix. I had just never heard it refered to as "track interleave". I been doing this years and know Sonar very well, but when there is a term or anything I am not familar with. I ask, thats how you learn. Thanks for the answer...................JDW

Hi John,

I think there is something else to it in relation to how the actual .WAV file is written to the disk - mono vs. stereo - but that piece of arcarnery has escaped me. The 'bow-tie' thing is essentially where the rubber hits the road in the Sonar interface as it relates to track interleave.

If you do a search, there is a post somewhere on here from Ron where he explained it - from memory, around the time of the S4 launch.

Ciao,

Q.

Thanks for the heads up Q Werty. I'm gonna do that search and post it. If it could be helpfull to this thread............................JDW

Okay here are some relevent threads to this thread. With CW comments and all....................JDW

Differences in Audio Engines

Audio Engines

Well I'll be damned !!!

No poop, man...the problem tracks are mono; & set to mono automatically in SONAR XL2.2.

I opened the project tonite in SONAR4; & those tracks there are set to stereo (even though they're frickin' mono !!!)

Scott Reams...you're OK in my book.

Thanks very much. & like Q said...there's definitely a summing difference.

First thing I'll do (after checking to see that all interleaving matches in v4)...is to see if the project then sounds the same. Then I'll bounce; & report back.

Thanks again,

mark4man


O,BTW - Appreciate your candor on SONAR4's prettiness vs. ugliness; & operational functionality/efficiency...but the Cubase forums is loaded with malcontents who dove off the good ship Cakewalk after v4's release. I'm stayin'...but I'm still mad as hell.