Fighting with Reason

[8cros]

Did anyone null test the last example I posted btw?

I will take a quick look for you- some people here do not really seem to be helping much.,and do not test correctly(not saying I do,but I trust my findings,because they are repeatable by anybody else)

Are you sure the 2 files are both totally clean/flat and no faders touched? bounced,or exported from masterbus? Be certain please.
None of this is science apart from the 'fact' science is an adventure of discovery-nothing more,nothing less. =)
Brb.

No master bus effects in either.
But ProTools is bounced from imported stems.'
Reason is generating the sounds from the samplers and amp sim etc. on each track.

And therein lies your problem. Again, it's not as easy to understand how to do these tests properly as folks think. I keep saying that because folks keep messing up the tests and drawing inaccurate conclusions. If you want dependable answers, follow the protocols I outlined previously.

That is to say you must do EXACTLY THE SAME THING when generating your stereo output files. You did two DIFFERENT things - you didn't use the same source files (stems) for BOTH tests. Why does this matter? Because if you don't you're not comparing apples to apples. As I previously mentioned, ANY random or semi random process will skew the results, such as a free LFO, a reverb, a delay with modulation that's based on a free sync LFO, etc.

By starting with the SAME EXACT audio stems in both cases you ensure a more accurate comparison. You are removing ALL of the variables EXCEPT the ones you wish to compare. It's also important to NOT use dither for any of these tests, as dither can also be "random" and skew the results.

I feel like I'm repeating myself here, but these details are not "optional" when doing a null test. If we are going to do this, lets do it right - that's all I'm saying!

Selig, I appreciate your patience and persistence, but you do keep misunderstanding what solution I've been seeking.
You've inadvertently helped me, but you keep missing the point here. My point was never to prove that Reason handles audio differently or not, but to understand why a snare sound will sound better to my ears, when imported into Pro Tools, rather than in my Reason mix.
I have the suspected answer, which is because the bounce to audio is coloring the file nicely. The stem is sounding better to me than the hypersamples being triggered. The stem responds differently to eq, compression and master bus processing, than the modules are.
Or so it seems. I'll check it out in the morning.
Thanks bro.

You certainly will give us all the project files?

[Riverman]

Without adding a single plugin or touching the faders, it all just sounds so much better balanced and together.
Why?
It's so bizarre and it's without fail.

The purpose of a null test is to separate the hard data from the possible audio 'deceptions'.
If you have imported like 10stems into reason and not touched a single fader or plugin/rack unit then in theory they should be identical on playback to protools.
Maybe close your eyes 1st,and then listen,because even visual elements can cause a distortion in perception.
When I 1st started using reason,I had similar thoughts about the internal sound and exporting-but I just use it,and can get a competitive mix from it,just as well as anything else I use now.
I think some others just like to beat this topic up and those that start them.
If there is no hard data to compare then this is why others may say "it's all in your head" type of comments... sigh.

You just made an "it's all in you head" type comment above, then appear to criticize others for their "it's all in your head" type comments. Maybe it's time to wind down or even close this thread?

To review:
The OP stated he heard a difference between Reason and PT when nothing at all was done, others provided evidence to the contrary and pointed out where his original comparison was flawed. Now we have folks calling each other liars.

I believe everyone has enough evidence to make up their own minds. If anyone has anything more to offer on topic and on a positive note, say it now. Otherwise I feel we should all agree to disagree.

BTW, the answer to my question: "What can you tell me about the original files" is (in an absolute way) "NOTHING". In a more specific way all you can know is that there is "some" difference in timing, level, EQ/phase, distortion, FX, etc. You can't even draw reliable conclusions from the level of the resultant audio after a null test - if it's caused by a delay then how much delay will create how much level resulting from a null test?

In the test in question you may be able to narrow it down to an EQ/phase, delay, or any tonal change. And that's my point: Drawing any conclusion from a null test is fraught with problems.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Why are you persisting with this straw man?
Are you even trying to understand what I've been saying?
You're arguing against a position I never had.
You're speaking past me and ignoring my repeated attempts to correct a misunderstanding.
Why?

Please clarify.
I'm trying to calm things and clarify your original point: "Without adding a single plugin or touching the faders, it all just sounds so much better balanced and together.
Why?"

Apologies if I'm missing something, but my job as moderator is to try to keep things on track based on the OP's (you, in this case) original questions.

As said I'm guessing something is going on when the tracks are being bounced down. It's an issue of it sounding better when each track is audio rather than being triggered live.
I might try importing the stems into Reason rather than Pro Tools and seeing if that has the same "ahhhh" effect next time.

Unless you want to test this theory, I'd say leave it and just do what you do. You prefer mixing in Pro Tools, so why not mix in Pro Tools and be done with it! The only thing happening when bouncing to audio is any FX are "frozen" and will be exactly the same each time.

Again, if you prefer exporting from Reason and mixing in Pro Tools, then JUST DO IT!

But if you want to "science" and find the "why", you'll have to learn a few techniques first.

Ah, but it's a real drag importing into ProTools if I have to go back and do endless revisions on a job. Every time I make an adjustment, then bouncing out and importing... It adds time and takes up drive space (because I have to keep each version as sometimes they'll go back and pick an earlier version)
It's so much easier from that point of view, to just do it all in Reason. If it were an album project sure, record in Reason, then bounce out and mix. No problem. But TVCs are a different beast.

[EnochLight]

Just a silly question for the OP, but are you doing this at the same sample and bit rate in both PT and Reason? When you export, are you selecting the dithering option in Reason or leaving it off? Are you exporting at the same sample and bit rate? Not sure this would affect anything, but just a thought...

[jam-s]

Just a silly question for the OP, but are you doing this at the same sample and bit rate in both PT and Reason? When you export, are you selecting the dithering option in Reason or leaving it off? Are you exporting at the same sample and bit rate? Not sure this would affect anything, but just a thought...

@OP: This might be a possible cause. Also are you absolutely sure on your signal path both in Reason and Protools regarding FX levels, insert FX and general audio levels? It might just be something simple like the stems having a higher peak level due to normalisation or something simple like this.

[8cros]

They asked me to leave, I hope I have helped someone.
I deleted my video.

[Kenni]

They asked me to leave, I hope I have helped someone.
I deleted my video.

I did not, I asked you to hold back on replying unless you had something construtive to add.

[Riverman]

Just a silly question for the OP, but are you doing this at the same sample and bit rate in both PT and Reason? When you export, are you selecting the dithering option in Reason or leaving it off? Are you exporting at the same sample and bit rate? Not sure this would affect anything, but just a thought...

Dithering is off, I'll check on the sample rate variable.
I record in 48/24 in Tools.
Both stereo AIFs are obviously 44/16
I don't recall whether I bounced the stems as 44.1/24 or 48/24 as I have ProTools automatically converting no matter what.

[8cros]

They asked me to leave, I hope I have helped someone.
I deleted my video.

I did not, I asked you to hold back on replying unless you had something construtive to add.

Google does not understand you. In any case, I will not upload these tests again.

[Logismos]

I don't recall whether I bounced the stems as 44.1/24 or 48/24 as I have ProTools automatically converting no matter what.

"Know thy equipments" it's quite important if your engineering.
I checked your uploads,and found a really noticeable set of differences.
Here's a pic of the 1st drum transient.. >

PTRSN bnc diffs.jpg (62.72 KiB) Viewed 1579 times

Hopefully you see that.^
From your example it totally sounds like mid side processing--there is the differences from this eg.

Your original post is how reason kinda throws off your mixing techniques,so stick with what 'feels/sounds and works right' to you.
I can feel your slight frustration-and am sure both your ears and music making skills are distinctive -
Do you actually record,or work for any commercial tv or radio btw? the examples sound to be 'commercial'.

[selig]

I don't recall whether I bounced the stems as 44.1/24 or 48/24 as I have ProTools automatically converting no matter what.

"Know thy equipments" it's quite important if your engineering.
I checked your uploads,and found a really noticeable set of differences.
Here's a pic of the 1st drum transient.. >

PTRSN bnc diffs.jpg

Hopefully you see that.^
From your example it totally sounds like mid side processing--there is the differences from this eg.

Your original post is how reason kinda throws off your mixing techniques,so stick with what 'feels/sounds and works right' to you.
I can feel your slight frustration-and am sure both your ears and music making skills are distinctive -
Do you actually record,or work for any commercial tv or radio btw? the examples sound to be 'commercial'.

That's what I found as well, and Know Thy Tools is the title of a blog I'm writing - did wiki-leaks hit me? (great minds, yada yada, etc.)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[8cros]

They asked me to leave, I hope I have helped someone.
I deleted my video.

I did not, I asked you to hold back on replying unless you had something construtive to add.

There is a micro peaks below. But this limitation faders SSL.
The files are identical in principle.

I made a short version without unnecessary noise.
Well I think it's constructive. Correct me.

[8cros]

I don't speak Polish man. I have no idea what you were doing. And I'm on an iPhone, I can't see what you're doing either. I'm just hearing my track very soft, and you speaking in Polish.

I love Starcraft and did not want to interrupt the battle.
But if you are against "not competent rusish-polish". I'd like to hear it.

[Kenni]

I don't speak Polish man. I have no idea what you were doing. And I'm on an iPhone, I can't see what you're doing either. I'm just hearing my track very soft, and you speaking in Polish.

I love Starcraft and did not want to interrupt the battle.
But if you are against "not competent rusish-polish". I'd like to hear it.

We're not at all, don't misunderstand us There was just a new discussion starting with 7 nested quotes, it started to get confusing and a bit off topic.

[Gorgon]

Selig, I appreciate your patience and persistence, but you do keep misunderstanding what solution I've been seeking.

I can't believe how you're insulting Selig here, who is actually trying to help you, while others have already given up (like myself) because the others know that you will never understand it because you're not listening to anything that's being said. You're bumbling around trying to cook up all sorts of own "test recipes" and you don't know what the hell you're doing. You remind me of myself when I was 9 years old and had a science box with a little microscope and little bottles with different liquids which you could mix together and pretend you made a potion.

You've inadvertently helped me, but you keep missing the point here. My point was never to prove that Reason handles audio differently or not, but to understand why a snare sound will sound better to my ears, when imported into Pro Tools, rather than in my Reason mix.

Oh is that it? Really? Well, the only freaking thing you have to do is import THE SAME FREAKING SAMPLE into both Pro Tools and Reason WITHOUT ANY VST'S OR EFFECTS OR COMPRESSORS OR WHATEVER, export both those AT THE SAME FREAKING BITRATE and you would have exactly the same snare.

I have the suspected answer, which is because the bounce to audio is coloring the file nicely. The stem is sounding better to me than the hypersamples being triggered. The stem responds differently to eq, compression and master bus processing, than the modules are.
Or so it seems. I'll check it out in the morning.
Thanks bro.

"Or so it seems". That illustrates it precisely.

[Kenni]

Saying stems responds differently to EQ is only valid if it's the same EQ being used in pro tools and reason, which I highly doubt.

Given that you have undithered stems with no effects on any channels with no gains, you have the same file.

Do a neutral, undithered bounce from both DAWs and listen to them in the same OS native audio player. If you feel there's a difference, it's a psychological effect.

[Kenni]

And here are some quotes on the matter, from a study done by ImageLine.

Marketing has influenced you - Yes it has. Digital audio is just a stream of numbers. Computers add up numbers in a well understood and predictable way, if they didn't we'd constantly have satellites raining down on us from the sky. We are talking here basic mathematics (addition, subtraction and division), there is no magic, there are no secret things that some DAW manufacturers know that others don't. Dithering and interpolation are well understood and there are plenty of options in most DAW software to give you control over them. But understand, that the suppliers of professional and consumer audio equipment have strongly vested interests in convincing you that you need to upgrade to the latest and greatest gear/format, that's how they make money, selling gear based on specifications. Audio quality ceased to be a meaningful differentiator of music production software platforms once they had all moved to 32 Bit float internal processing.

The weakest link - Human hearing. Surely 24 Bit 192 kHz wav files sound superior to the 16 Bit 44.1 kHz wav files used on CDs? As we have been referencing, the largest and best study conducted to date (see the reference below)1 shows that there is no audible difference between 'high-end' audio formats ~24 Bit @ 192 kHz and 16 Bit 44.1 kHz (CD standard). A user-friendly article discussing the research can be read at the following link: http://www.mixonline.com/news/profiles/ ... ate/365968

You have influenced you - You can't make an unbiased comparison of the audio from two sources, A and B, if you know what source you are listening to at any given time. You can't so forget it, perceptual psychologists realized this over 100 years ago (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychophysics) and developed many useful methodologies to work around it. In particular the 'blind listening' experiment with an 'objective response indicator'. An objective response indicator is one where there is a right or wrong answer. For example, is this sample A or sample B (not which sounds better, that's subjective).

Get a friend to play you the two sources in random-order pairs. Your task is to simply identify source A and B, nothing more, nothing less. If you can distinguish source A vs B, at least 8 times, or more, from 10 random-order paired comparisons, then you may be able to hear something.

Conclusions

First, all major DAW applications can process audio without introducing unwanted distortions, frequency response alterations or any other unwanted effect that would be 'clearly audible' so as to sway opinion. If you do hear something obvious, then look for the obvious causes (numbered above).
Second, we are not saying that high quality analog gear, microphones, mic preamps and even 24 bit recording don't have a place or do not matter. These things definitely have a place in the production phase. What we are saying is the influence of the DAW in processing this information AND digital distribution formats greater than 16 bit @ 44.1 kHz have been vastly over-exaggerated in the minds of the music producing set. What matters most is mixing skill & performance. Both these 'essential elements' come from humans not the technology.

Some time in the late 1990's we moved beyond the point where technical improvements to 'fidelity' ceased to have any meaningful impact on the audible quality of the music being produced. Further, with the Loudness Wars of the 2000's and widespread adoption of low bit-rate mp3's as a music distribution standard, it's clear that audio quality has been going backwards for a while now, but people are still enjoying their music.

In conclusion, we'd like to leave you with a quote from photographer Vernon Trent -

"Amateurs worry about equipment, professionals worry about money, masters worry about light. I just take pictures"

[drloop]

But just to be sure: Drloop, can you confirm your PT/Reason null test showed a null greater than 6 dB?

All DAWs tested null down to -125-130db.
Sonar, Reason, Pro Tools, Logic, Cubase, Nuendo, Live...
With one excepetion Harrison Mixbus.

Riverman, if you have problem with the workflow in Reason and getting good result, use PT instead. But don´t blame Reason.

I left Cubase, not because it sounded bad but I felt like an engineer using Cubase, I started to use Tracktion instead and that got my up to speed and I started to having fun recording again. Now I use Reason instead, I like how Reason works and have no problem getting good sound when I mix. But I am not an engineer. So I understand your frustration.

Me and my friend spend more time making sounds and song, we don´t worry about sound quality.
We spend hours doing silly things like having Thor to say our orchestras name "Thinkingmachine"


No samples included just Thor.
Do creative stuff in Reason!

Good luck in the future!

[Logismos]

That's what I found as well, and Know Thy Tools is the title of a blog I'm writing - did wiki-leaks hit me?

Loolz-perhaps ask Julian

PTRSN bnc diffs.jpg (62.72 KiB) Viewed 90 times not a single comment-
Obvious differences with them 2 files-- they are apparently identical in format/sample size- but there is a mid/side level increase of about 3.5db on 1 file.
There is midside discrepancies -no doubt about that.
Now,audible differences are what's actually at stake here-because when it comes to crunching numbers,computers are fairly reliable and consistant.

Some replies here seem well out of context and retarded imo.
And yes kenni,that^ is a very cival reply it could be much worse.
Carry on craziness.

[Kenni]

Some replies here seem well out of context and retarded imo.
And yes kenni,that^ is a very cival reply it could be much worse.
Carry on craziness.

No worries, I'm not anal about these things I'm just not a fan of sidetracking for no apparent reason.

There's two ways to approach this: The scientific approach utilizing logic and knowledge of machine code, and the scientific approach utilizing psychology. Both approaches are very well understood and documented. They all point in the same direction:

There must be no audible difference. If there is, it's:

• A) Because there's settings in your DAW concerning export/bouncing that treats the audio pre/during/post a rendered/live bounce. This value can be controlled (disabled) in all DAW's
• B) A psychological effect. Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychophysics and http://www.mixonline.com/news/profiles/ ... ate/365968 and this quote:

  Marketing has influenced you - Yes it has. Digital audio is just a stream of numbers. Computers add up numbers in a well understood and predictable way, if they didn't we'd constantly have satellites raining down on us from the sky. We are talking here basic mathematics (addition, subtraction and division), there is no magic, there are no secret things that some DAW manufacturers know that others don't. Dithering and interpolation are well understood and there are plenty of options in most DAW software to give you control over them. But understand, that the suppliers of professional and consumer audio equipment have strongly vested interests in convincing you that you need to upgrade to the latest and greatest gear/format, that's how they make money, selling gear based on specifications. Audio quality ceased to be a meaningful differentiator of music production software platforms once they had all moved to 32 Bit float internal processing.

I'm sorry, but further points given in this discussion are mute. Quote:

Whatever you may have found, or think you have found, there are many settings and options that affect the live and rendered audio from your DAW (sometimes differently) and the same is true for any other DAW. Please make sure you understand what these settings and options are, and if you venture into loop-talk with such a claim, be prepared to provide example audio files and evidence you have discounted all the items listed below as the cause. Source: https://www.image-line.com/support/FLHe ... _audio.htm

[selig]

Me and my friend spend more time making sounds and song, we don´t worry about sound quality.
We spend hours doing silly things like having Thor to say our orchestras name "Thinkingmachine"

I would assert that possibly the reason you spend more time making music etc. is that you have put your mind at ease as to the other more technical issues.

That's how my mind works, at least, and why I took the time to make the comparisons myself. Once I had proven to myself there was no difference in the basic audio path, I got on with the business of making music without having to constantly look over my shoulder or worry about my tools!



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Logismos]

[ Audio quality ceased to be a meaningful differentiator of music production software platforms once they had all moved to 32 Bit float internal processing.

^Correct in a sense,but also non-sense in another.
When you import in reason or pro tools- there is a convertion process #1.
When you render or bounce anything- this is also a convertion,but normally this actual process is utilizing an audio interface of some kind.(the IO.)
I previously posted the difference are phase,because each nanosecond of time,your interface is phasing constantly..when you come to bounce,a static image is printed.
When compared again,your audio interface is again,phasing at different points of it's spectrum.
That is all. ?

*edit -
The only way to really settle this is by informing each daw manufacturer,and getting them to release official-unbiased reports.
^This will clear up the matter in a jiffy.

[selig]

[ Audio quality ceased to be a meaningful differentiator of music production software platforms once they had all moved to 32 Bit float internal processing.

^Correct in a sense,but also non-sense in another.
When you import in reason or pro tools- there is a convertion process #1.
When you render or bounce anything- this is also a convertion,but normally this actual process is utilizing an audio interface of some kind.(the IO.)
I previously posted the difference are phase,because each nanosecond of time,your interface is phasing constantly..when you come to bounce,a static image is printed.
When compared again,your audio interface is again,phasing at different points of it's spectrum.
That is all. ?

*edit -
The only way to really settle this is by informing each daw manufacturer,and getting them to release official-unbiased reports.
^This will clear up the matter in a jiffy.

What conversion do you reckon is going on when you import a file? Converting from what to what? How would this affect the sound in any way? I mean, yes you can convert from .aif to .wav, but this only converts the headers and not the sample data - is that the type of conversion you're talking about?

And you bring up the idea of "phase" again, and mention your "interface is phasing" which means what exactly? And why is your interface a factor when you import or export?

Maybe you're using the term "phasing" in a way that's not the standard way I was taught. As for the digital stream, the only way to introduce a phase shift is to add code to explicitly address this - there is no specification that addresses a constantly changing phase in software OR hardware, so I'm assuming we're talking about different things or using different terms.

Can you point me to some information that speaks to the phasing you speak of above?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Logismos]

Can you point me to some information that speaks to the phasing you speak of above?:)

Selig,if you want lessons I don't think you could afford my fees.
Wasted more than enough energy here- i'm trying to make music!!! rofl. please,,,no more quotes!!!
I hope Riverman gets what he is looking for=satisfaction...apparently,some can't get none.

[selig]

Can you point me to some information that speaks to the phasing you speak of above?:)

Selig,if you want lessons I don't think you could afford my fees.
Wasted more than enough energy here- i'm trying to make music!!! rofl. please,,,no more quotes!!!
I hope Riverman gets what he is looking for=satisfaction...apparently,some can't get none.

I wanted to either understand your unique view (or expose it as fiction), or eat crow when you schooled me (wouldn't be the first time for me, it's how I learn and grow!) - your choice.
And hey, if you're not here to share your knowledge and experience like the rest of us (and you're not here to learn) then why exactly ARE you here?

[Ottostrom]

Can you point me to some information that speaks to the phasing you speak of above?:)

Selig,if you want lessons I don't think you could afford my fees.
Wasted more than enough energy here- i'm trying to make music!!! rofl. please,,,no more quotes!!!
I hope Riverman gets what he is looking for=satisfaction...apparently,some can't get none.

I wanted to either understand your unique view (or expose it as fiction), or eat crow when you schooled me (wouldn't be the first time for me, it's how I learn and grow!) - your choice.
And hey, if you're not here to share your knowledge and experience like the rest of us (and you're not here to learn) then why exactly ARE you here?

Ofc he wont school you in anything, since almost everything he wrote was plain BS.
Oh, its my audio interface that is exporting my songs? Well how can I still bounce and render stuff without my interface plugged in?
And now everything is moving around constantly because of phasing? I better export my tracks 20 times to make sure I capture the best sounding one!