Fighting with Reason

[Logismos]

Some of the replies here are truly bizarre = not worth any type of reply.
I guess you girls n guys will have to do your own homework.
Good luck-good riddance reasonsquawk.
I guess I laughed a lot.Ty.

[selig]

Some of the replies here are truly bizarre = not worth any type of reply.
I guess you girls n guys will have to do your own homework.
Good luck-good riddance reasonsquawk.
I guess I laughed a lot.Ty.

Yes, there are some bizarre replies, but they tend to weed themselves out over time.

We try to accommodate all types here, but still, we're obviously not for everyone.
Glad you gave us a shot, see you on the flip side!
And if you ever need a good laugh, you know where to find us.

[Gorgon]

Some of the replies here are truly bizarre = not worth any type of reply.

Most likely the kind of replies with questions that you can't answer.

[8cros]

Some of the replies here are truly bizarre = not worth any type of reply.
I guess you girls n guys will have to do your own homework.
Good luck-good riddance reasonsquawk.
I guess I laughed a lot.Ty.

you girls n guys >... Googl
вы, девочки, русские парни>...Googl

you girls Russian guys
It's a game of ethnic hatred?

I have a feeling that there is a very stuffy atmosphere for all that to the east.
Or gender.


You, girls, like Russian guys.

[submonsterz]

So I can't answer your question with a "no" because it would be far from accurate because I DO code the REs, I just don't work in C++.

Still, you seem to be giving a lot of weight to the final coding part over the design and coding of the algorithms and signal flow. I DO code the prototypes, and the C++ is DIRECTLY translated from my code.

Curious how important do you feel each stage of development actually is to the end results? You seem to be giving a lot of weight to the final coding of the C++ aspects while dismissing EVERYTHING that comes before - or am I reading too much into this and you are really intending on giving me the credit for that coding work?

And really curious why this is important to you? I explained the process because I assumed from your question you knew nothing about it - was I wrong?

I don't think submonsterz understands much about designing software.

Explain him that Steve Duda too needed some maths coding from a external coder to write his beloved Serum..sometimes is a team work. Is not a crime... but I don't follow the point he wants show this poor guy. And Selig is a lord to explain him all details of his RE projects . [emoji15]

Mixer different channels. Reason - mono channels. Cubase - stereo.

Stereo mix gives the difference.

Very well spotted - that would almost definitely explain it. Thanks

I just caught a similar thing doing a different summing test, where Logic imported stereo files (those appended with an L and R) into a stereo track rather than two mono tracks - ARG, so many little things to look out for!!!

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

Really you guys need to keep ya eye on the thread i did not ask jack shit .
I answered a question posed by another set of users so ermm wtf are you two on about really .
All this bullshit really really has got my back up now .
So im out alltogether.
And by the way none of you know me or what my level of experience is in jack shit i dont do my laundry on forums i just sit pretty retired for the last near on 22 years at the age of now 47 from my past work that one out while ya trying to sell ya cheap tracks fellas enjoy adios ....

[selig]

So I can't answer your question with a "no" because it would be far from accurate because I DO code the REs, I just don't work in C++.

Still, you seem to be giving a lot of weight to the final coding part over the design and coding of the algorithms and signal flow. I DO code the prototypes, and the C++ is DIRECTLY translated from my code.

Curious how important do you feel each stage of development actually is to the end results? You seem to be giving a lot of weight to the final coding of the C++ aspects while dismissing EVERYTHING that comes before - or am I reading too much into this and you are really intending on giving me the credit for that coding work?

And really curious why this is important to you? I explained the process because I assumed from your question you knew nothing about it - was I wrong?

I don't think submonsterz understands much about designing software.

Explain him that Steve Duda too needed some maths coding from a external coder to write his beloved Serum..sometimes is a team work. Is not a crime... but I don't follow the point he wants show this poor guy. And Selig is a lord to explain him all details of his RE projects . [emoji15]

Mixer different channels. Reason - mono channels. Cubase - stereo.

Stereo mix gives the difference.

Very well spotted - that would almost definitely explain it. Thanks

I just caught a similar thing doing a different summing test, where Logic imported stereo files (those appended with an L and R) into a stereo track rather than two mono tracks - ARG, so many little things to look out for!!!

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

Really you guys need to keep ya eye on the thread i did not ask jack shit.
I answered a question posed by another set of users so ermm wtf are you two on about really .
All this bullshit really really has got my back up now .
So im out alltogether.
And by the way none of you know me or what my level of experience is in jack shit i dont do my laundry on forums i just sit pretty retired for the last near on 22 years at the age of now 47 from my past work that one out while ya trying to sell ya cheap tracks fellas enjoy adios ....

No you did not ask a question, but you DID answer a question incorrectly that only I would know the answer to. So be it, I don't need you to answer my questions for me, especially when you have no way of knowing the truth. What IS your point trying to answer for me? I don't get it, it's so easy to get along here with very little effort, but it takes far more effort to cause trouble IMO.

As I said earlier today: "We try to accommodate all types here, but still, we're obviously not for everyone."

If you're leaving, I'm truly sorry to see you go, and if you go, you're always welcome to return if you change your mind!

[Gorgon]

Really you guys need to keep ya eye on the thread i did not ask jack shit .
I answered a question posed by another set of users so ermm wtf are you two on about really .
All this bullshit really really has got my back up now .
So im out alltogether.
And by the way none of you know me or what my level of experience is in jack shit i dont do my laundry on forums i just sit pretty retired for the last near on 22 years at the age of now 47 from my past work that one out while ya trying to sell ya cheap tracks fellas enjoy adios ....

Well forgive me, submonsters, it's quite hard to see if you're asking a question or just saying something. That's why interpunction was invented, but you don't seem to use it. If you did, it might be easier to discern the questions from the statements.

[selig]

Wow, what a day!

Are we done here yet?!?

[Gorgon]

Wow, what a day!

Are we done here yet?!?

I was going to say yes, but somehow, Reason sounds different....

[WongoTheSane]

Wow, what a day!

Are we done here yet?!?

I was going to say yes, but somehow, Reason sounds different....

It's because of the dBs. They're not the same.

[lowpryo]

man, 16 pages of this! and it's funny, the people that accuse Reason of being flawed are always the ones who are more hostile, or who dismiss legitimate suggestions. then they say they're "done here", over and over.

and it's sad because I actually do hear a difference in the original files he posted, and I wanna know what was different! I know one was limited +6 dB, but I hear more than that. the ProTools one sounds brighter, even though that's the one that's an mp3? were there Reason devices applied that were taking away some high end? I'm confused and I just skimmed through all these pages to not really find much of anything.

[selig]

man, 16 pages of this! and it's funny, the people that accuse Reason of being flawed are always the ones who are more hostile, or who dismiss legitimate suggestions. then they say they're "done here", over and over.

and it's sad because I actually do hear a difference in the original files he posted, and I wanna know what was different! I know one was limited +6 dB, but I hear more than that. the ProTools one sounds brighter, even though that's the one that's an mp3? were there Reason devices applied that were taking away some high end? I'm confused and I just skimmed through all these pages to not really find much of anything.

That Pro Tools file was limited by 6 dB, which is a fair amount! And given that louder sounds better, that 6 dB extra gain on top of the compressed dynamics gave it a huge advantage IMO. Hence, PT sounds "fatter" - damn right it's fatter, it better be after that much processing.

Later in the thread the processing was eliminated and it was shown that there was no difference - even when summing 64 tracks (also no difference doing the same thing in Logic).

There are older version of PT that are not floating point like Logic and Reason, and this may be where the differences were noted. But now that all versions of PT are floating point, there appears to be no difference, at least no difference that anyone can point out.

[Riverman]

Regarding dynamics or pan laws or anything like that...are you talking just importing the vocal and doing absolutely nothing to it?

I've had a similar feeling when importing a piano wav from FL Studio (using the Korg M1 vst) into Reason and at first I'm like, does this sound different. After a bit of retrospect I come to the conclusion it doesn't.

Check this out as well:-

http://www.image-line.com/support/FLHel ... _audio.htm

Importing the individual stripes. Not just single files. It's in the summing.

I agree with you about summing. I find mixes let's say in cubase much more "clean" that in Reason. It's not the problem about a single file to invert the phase on it but the matter of 15 or more tracks. Reason seems to muddy all those ( and with vocals expecially). A fan here too since v1 and I produce song for labels and dozens of ghost producers. [emoji2] .

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

Yeah it's with vocals that it's the most problematic. Just won't sit right. Very hard to describe. WIll be too loud one second, adjust and it's too soft. Very hard to find balance, unlike in others. It doesn't seem to matter if I'm using the SSL compressor, or the Reason compressors. Don't know whether it's something in how the compressors are all relating on playback or what? It's weird though.
Glad to hear I'm not alone. The struggle is real!
I otherwise love working in Reason.
Although video support would be nice!

[Riverman]

man, 16 pages of this! and it's funny, the people that accuse Reason of being flawed are always the ones who are more hostile, or who dismiss legitimate suggestions. then they say they're "done here", over and over.

and it's sad because I actually do hear a difference in the original files he posted, and I wanna know what was different! I know one was limited +6 dB, but I hear more than that. the ProTools one sounds brighter, even though that's the one that's an mp3? were there Reason devices applied that were taking away some high end? I'm confused and I just skimmed through all these pages to not really find much of anything.

That Pro Tools file was limited by 6 dB, which is a fair amount! And given that louder sounds better, that 6 dB extra gain on top of the compressed dynamics gave it a huge advantage IMO. Hence, PT sounds "fatter" - damn right it's fatter, it better be after that much processing.

Later in the thread the processing was eliminated and it was shown that there was no difference - even when summing 64 tracks (also no difference doing the same thing in Logic).

There are older version of PT that are not floating point like Logic and Reason, and this may be where the differences were noted. But now that all versions of PT are floating point, there appears to be no difference, at least no difference that anyone can point out.

I have PT11 but does it make a diff if all the stems are 48/24?

I mean if the printed stems are 48/24 wouldn't a session of printed stems logically sound different to the one with Reason synths and samplers and virtual amps being generated in real time? That would explain to me why the first Reason file didn't null, but the second (with printed stems) did.

[selig]

Regarding dynamics or pan laws or anything like that...are you talking just importing the vocal and doing absolutely nothing to it?

I've had a similar feeling when importing a piano wav from FL Studio (using the Korg M1 vst) into Reason and at first I'm like, does this sound different. After a bit of retrospect I come to the conclusion it doesn't.

Check this out as well:-

http://www.image-line.com/support/FLHel ... _audio.htm

Importing the individual stripes. Not just single files. It's in the summing.

I agree with you about summing. I find mixes let's say in cubase much more "clean" that in Reason. It's not the problem about a single file to invert the phase on it but the matter of 15 or more tracks. Reason seems to muddy all those ( and with vocals expecially). A fan here too since v1 and I produce song for labels and dozens of ghost producers. [emoji2] .

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

Yeah it's with vocals that it's the most problematic. Just won't sit right. Very hard to describe. WIll be too loud one second, adjust and it's too soft. Very hard to find balance, unlike in others. It doesn't seem to matter if I'm using the SSL compressor, or the Reason compressors. Don't know whether it's something in how the compressors are all relating on playback or what? It's weird though.
Glad to hear I'm not alone. The struggle is real!
I otherwise love working in Reason.
Although video support would be nice!

OK, we hear what we hear, but if Reason is "muddy" than PT and Logic are too. I thought someone did the Cubase test showing it was the same as Reason etc. but maybe I was mistaken.

There's really no reason for vocals to behave any different than other tracks. But if you're not using the same compressors in both apps, it's the COMPRESSORS you're struggling with, not the DAW.

[lowpryo]

man, 16 pages of this! and it's funny, the people that accuse Reason of being flawed are always the ones who are more hostile, or who dismiss legitimate suggestions. then they say they're "done here", over and over.

and it's sad because I actually do hear a difference in the original files he posted, and I wanna know what was different! I know one was limited +6 dB, but I hear more than that. the ProTools one sounds brighter, even though that's the one that's an mp3? were there Reason devices applied that were taking away some high end? I'm confused and I just skimmed through all these pages to not really find much of anything.

That Pro Tools file was limited by 6 dB, which is a fair amount! And given that louder sounds better, that 6 dB extra gain on top of the compressed dynamics gave it a huge advantage IMO. Hence, PT sounds "fatter" - damn right it's fatter, it better be after that much processing.

Later in the thread the processing was eliminated and it was shown that there was no difference - even when summing 64 tracks (also no difference doing the same thing in Logic).

There are older version of PT that are not floating point like Logic and Reason, and this may be where the differences were noted. But now that all versions of PT are floating point, there appears to be no difference, at least no difference that anyone can point out.

hmm, I notice the Pro Tools one not only sounds "fatter" but also brighter. like, more high end. which is weird because I would expect the opposite from an mp3. maybe the mastering chain with the limiting also had some kind of multiband processing that explains what i'm hearing. or maybe i'm not level-matching well enough, or my ears are playing tricks! good to know that the DAW difference was eliminated though.

[Riverman]

Regarding dynamics or pan laws or anything like that...are you talking just importing the vocal and doing absolutely nothing to it?

I've had a similar feeling when importing a piano wav from FL Studio (using the Korg M1 vst) into Reason and at first I'm like, does this sound different. After a bit of retrospect I come to the conclusion it doesn't.

Check this out as well:-

http://www.image-line.com/support/FLHel ... _audio.htm

Importing the individual stripes. Not just single files. It's in the summing.

I agree with you about summing. I find mixes let's say in cubase much more "clean" that in Reason. It's not the problem about a single file to invert the phase on it but the matter of 15 or more tracks. Reason seems to muddy all those ( and with vocals expecially). A fan here too since v1 and I produce song for labels and dozens of ghost producers. [emoji2] .

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

Yeah it's with vocals that it's the most problematic. Just won't sit right. Very hard to describe. WIll be too loud one second, adjust and it's too soft. Very hard to find balance, unlike in others. It doesn't seem to matter if I'm using the SSL compressor, or the Reason compressors. Don't know whether it's something in how the compressors are all relating on playback or what? It's weird though.
Glad to hear I'm not alone. The struggle is real!
I otherwise love working in Reason.
Although video support would be nice!

OK, we hear what we hear, but if Reason is "muddy" than PT and Logic are too. I thought someone did the Cubase test showing it was the same as Reason etc. but maybe I was mistaken.

There's really no reason for vocals to behave any different than other tracks. But if you're not using the same compressors in both apps, it's the COMPRESSORS you're struggling with, not the DAW.

I always felt Logic 8 & 9 sounded "smaller". I'd have the same deal when exporting stems from Logic and importing into say Cubase years ago. Cubase just sounded cleaner and with more sonic info somehow.
People have mentioned an Ableton Sound... but maybe that's just if folks are relying on the stock Ableton samples and plugins?
The only difficulty in doing these tests are, they are the result, not the process. As in it's a mixed file, it's not demonstrating the actual process of adjusting and working in an open session.
The theory that dry stems all sound the same no matter which DAW you import them into is all well and good in that it's science. But it's unhelpful in that it's not a practical example of how so many of us work. As you'd said there are so many variables and various defaults.
Logic's default pan law (compensated) business for example.
I dunno... at the end of the day, i just came on here to vent a frustration. I was speaking emotionally about my process.
Making music is not easy, we struggle against our own limitations as much as any thing else.
I've been making music professionally since 1991 when I owned a Tascam 688, and would write "demos" that would then get recorded onto 24 tracks.
But I'm still seeking to improve - as we all do - and master the tools that have opened up incredible creative options. If I'd had Reason 25 years ago... my goodness.
Selig I appreciate your patient persistence and detailed explanations brother. And other contributors. It's all a good read, lots of good info.
Carry on!

[selig]

man, 16 pages of this! and it's funny, the people that accuse Reason of being flawed are always the ones who are more hostile, or who dismiss legitimate suggestions. then they say they're "done here", over and over.

and it's sad because I actually do hear a difference in the original files he posted, and I wanna know what was different! I know one was limited +6 dB, but I hear more than that. the ProTools one sounds brighter, even though that's the one that's an mp3? were there Reason devices applied that were taking away some high end? I'm confused and I just skimmed through all these pages to not really find much of anything.

That Pro Tools file was limited by 6 dB, which is a fair amount! And given that louder sounds better, that 6 dB extra gain on top of the compressed dynamics gave it a huge advantage IMO. Hence, PT sounds "fatter" - damn right it's fatter, it better be after that much processing.

Later in the thread the processing was eliminated and it was shown that there was no difference - even when summing 64 tracks (also no difference doing the same thing in Logic).

There are older version of PT that are not floating point like Logic and Reason, and this may be where the differences were noted. But now that all versions of PT are floating point, there appears to be no difference, at least no difference that anyone can point out.

I have PT11 but does it make a diff if all the stems are 48/24?

I mean if the printed stems are 48/24 wouldn't a session of printed stems logically sound different to the one with Reason synths and samplers and virtual amps being generated in real time? That would explain to me why the first Reason file didn't null, but the second (with printed stems) did.

Not sure why we keep coming back to the "real time" thing. I'll say this, that in older versions of PT the automation was lower priority than the audio (may be that way on all DAWs), and on an underpowered system you would get a difference on a larger session because the automation was very slightly different. But this was before non-real time bouncing, and all projects had to be bounced in real time - the only difference was the graphics were not updated during bounce, and maybe that made a difference?

But in Reason and other DAWs, there shouldn't be a problem - but who knows? Any issue would be more about timing jitter (if that) between playbacks.

As for the sample rate and bit rate - whether you bounce to that format or you playback the synths directly, you'll be listening to exactly the same sample rate and bit depth because your audio card doesn't change depending on whether your DAW plays a synth vs an audio file of that synth!

And no, it would not explain why the one Reason file didn't null, because you were NOT comparing the live playback to an audio track - you were comparing two audio files, right? The difference IMO came from the fact that there were random elements in the Reason mix that are not going to play back exactly the same every time. Once you bounced out the stems you had your "control" for your test.

It's like having someone play guitar through one amp, then play again through a second amp, and then comparing those vs splitting the guitar signal to the two amps and recording the same performance and comparing that.

I keep saying it again and again, if you want to compare one aspect between two sources you MUST eliminate ALL the other variables so you are actually only comparing the one parameter. In the case of the guitar example, you're comparing TWO parameters: the amps and the performances. How can you know which one is contributing to your choice?

Sorry to sound like a broken record here, I feel like we're covering the same ground here - if not, then forgive me and bear with me! Maybe someone else can answer in a better way than I'm answering…

[Gorgon]

Yeah it's with vocals that it's the most problematic. Just won't sit right. Very hard to describe. WIll be too loud one second, adjust and it's too soft.

This is exactly why you would use things like a compressor and/or a de-esser.

[selig]

man, 16 pages of this! and it's funny, the people that accuse Reason of being flawed are always the ones who are more hostile, or who dismiss legitimate suggestions. then they say they're "done here", over and over.

and it's sad because I actually do hear a difference in the original files he posted, and I wanna know what was different! I know one was limited +6 dB, but I hear more than that. the ProTools one sounds brighter, even though that's the one that's an mp3? were there Reason devices applied that were taking away some high end? I'm confused and I just skimmed through all these pages to not really find much of anything.

That Pro Tools file was limited by 6 dB, which is a fair amount! And given that louder sounds better, that 6 dB extra gain on top of the compressed dynamics gave it a huge advantage IMO. Hence, PT sounds "fatter" - damn right it's fatter, it better be after that much processing.

Later in the thread the processing was eliminated and it was shown that there was no difference - even when summing 64 tracks (also no difference doing the same thing in Logic).

There are older version of PT that are not floating point like Logic and Reason, and this may be where the differences were noted. But now that all versions of PT are floating point, there appears to be no difference, at least no difference that anyone can point out.

hmm, I notice the Pro Tools one not only sounds "fatter" but also brighter. like, more high end. which is weird because I would expect the opposite from an mp3. maybe the mastering chain with the limiting also had some kind of multiband processing that explains what i'm hearing. or maybe i'm not level-matching well enough, or my ears are playing tricks! good to know that the DAW difference was eliminated though.

It's LOUDER - that will always skew your perception. Remove that variable and compare and see if you feel the same way.

And mp3 files, if the rate is high enough, can sound quite good, so just because it's an mp3 doesn't necessarily mean it can't be "bright".

[Gorgon]

It's LOUDER - that will always skew your perception. Remove that variable and compare and see if you feel the same way.

And mp3 files, if the rate is high enough, can sound quite good, so just because it's an mp3 doesn't necessarily mean it can't be "bright".

I've had compliments on my mixing because all the tracks sounded so much brighter than what all the other DJ's were playing. I was playing 320 kbit MP3's bought from beatport and all the other DJ's were playing shit MP3's on 128. Yeah. That will explain it.

[Riverman]

Yeah it's with vocals that it's the most problematic. Just won't sit right. Very hard to describe. WIll be too loud one second, adjust and it's too soft.

This is exactly why you would use things like a compressor and/or a de-esser.

That's with compressors on buddy... That's with constant adjustments to the compressor ratio/attack, the track's volume, eq adjustments, reverb adjustments... it's just a very different experience. Hence the term "fighting with Reason". It's like constantly struggling with all the little adjustments.

[Riverman]

man, 16 pages of this! and it's funny, the people that accuse Reason of being flawed are always the ones who are more hostile, or who dismiss legitimate suggestions. then they say they're "done here", over and over.

and it's sad because I actually do hear a difference in the original files he posted, and I wanna know what was different! I know one was limited +6 dB, but I hear more than that. the ProTools one sounds brighter, even though that's the one that's an mp3? were there Reason devices applied that were taking away some high end? I'm confused and I just skimmed through all these pages to not really find much of anything.

That Pro Tools file was limited by 6 dB, which is a fair amount! And given that louder sounds better, that 6 dB extra gain on top of the compressed dynamics gave it a huge advantage IMO. Hence, PT sounds "fatter" - damn right it's fatter, it better be after that much processing.

Later in the thread the processing was eliminated and it was shown that there was no difference - even when summing 64 tracks (also no difference doing the same thing in Logic).

There are older version of PT that are not floating point like Logic and Reason, and this may be where the differences were noted. But now that all versions of PT are floating point, there appears to be no difference, at least no difference that anyone can point out.

I have PT11 but does it make a diff if all the stems are 48/24?

I mean if the printed stems are 48/24 wouldn't a session of printed stems logically sound different to the one with Reason synths and samplers and virtual amps being generated in real time? That would explain to me why the first Reason file didn't null, but the second (with printed stems) did.

Not sure why we keep coming back to the "real time" thing. I'll say this, that in older versions of PT the automation was lower priority than the audio (may be that way on all DAWs), and on an underpowered system you would get a difference on a larger session because the automation was very slightly different. But this was before non-real time bouncing, and all projects had to be bounced in real time - the only difference was the graphics were not updated during bounce, and maybe that made a difference?

But in Reason and other DAWs, there shouldn't be a problem - but who knows? Any issue would be more about timing jitter (if that) between playbacks.

As for the sample rate and bit rate - whether you bounce to that format or you playback the synths directly, you'll be listening to exactly the same sample rate and bit depth because your audio card doesn't change depending on whether your DAW plays a synth vs an audio file of that synth!

And no, it would not explain why the one Reason file didn't null, because you were NOT comparing the live playback to an audio track - you were comparing two audio files, right? The difference IMO came from the fact that there were random elements in the Reason mix that are not going to play back exactly the same every time. Once you bounced out the stems you had your "control" for your test.

It's like having someone play guitar through one amp, then play again through a second amp, and then comparing those vs splitting the guitar signal to the two amps and recording the same performance and comparing that.

I keep saying it again and again, if you want to compare one aspect between two sources you MUST eliminate ALL the other variables so you are actually only comparing the one parameter. In the case of the guitar example, you're comparing TWO parameters: the amps and the performances. How can you know which one is contributing to your choice?

Sorry to sound like a broken record here, I feel like we're covering the same ground here - if not, then forgive me and bear with me! Maybe someone else can answer in a better way than I'm answering…

I'm saying "real time", because a midi channel playing a synth is happening live in real time, it's not a printed audio file, which is fixed.
There is a difference between a synth generating sounds live, and a printed recording of it. That's why the files weren't nulling.

[lowpryo]

man, 16 pages of this! and it's funny, the people that accuse Reason of being flawed are always the ones who are more hostile, or who dismiss legitimate suggestions. then they say they're "done here", over and over.

and it's sad because I actually do hear a difference in the original files he posted, and I wanna know what was different! I know one was limited +6 dB, but I hear more than that. the ProTools one sounds brighter, even though that's the one that's an mp3? were there Reason devices applied that were taking away some high end? I'm confused and I just skimmed through all these pages to not really find much of anything.

That Pro Tools file was limited by 6 dB, which is a fair amount! And given that louder sounds better, that 6 dB extra gain on top of the compressed dynamics gave it a huge advantage IMO. Hence, PT sounds "fatter" - damn right it's fatter, it better be after that much processing.

Later in the thread the processing was eliminated and it was shown that there was no difference - even when summing 64 tracks (also no difference doing the same thing in Logic).

There are older version of PT that are not floating point like Logic and Reason, and this may be where the differences were noted. But now that all versions of PT are floating point, there appears to be no difference, at least no difference that anyone can point out.

hmm, I notice the Pro Tools one not only sounds "fatter" but also brighter. like, more high end. which is weird because I would expect the opposite from an mp3. maybe the mastering chain with the limiting also had some kind of multiband processing that explains what i'm hearing. or maybe i'm not level-matching well enough, or my ears are playing tricks! good to know that the DAW difference was eliminated though.

It's LOUDER - that will always skew your perception. Remove that variable and compare and see if you feel the same way.

And mp3 files, if the rate is high enough, can sound quite good, so just because it's an mp3 doesn't necessarily mean it can't be "bright".

i said i was level-matching! even when I turn the Pro Tools version to be quieter to my own ears, I still hear a bit more sparkle.

and I'm familiar with how good mp3 encoding has gotten. regardless, between an aiff and an mp3, if i was told that one had less high-end, i'd suspect the mp3! just funny is all.

[8cros]

For me exacerbation peak took place on November 14 during a super moon.

Already 18 number ....
But many still adrift.