Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: ***Sound Quality: Cubase vs. FL***

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    1,805
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Question ***Sound Quality: Cubase vs. FL***

    Sign in to disable this ad
    Is there actually a difference in the sound quality between these two programs? I mean if you sequence the same sound source into both programs and then export into an .mp3 is there any audible difference in sound quality?

    If not, I might switch over to FL7 because I love the sequencer...it doesnt get more basic than blocks on a grid!
    Last edited by GreenBurn; 01-25-2008 at 09:01 AM.
    : Myspace : PMP : Email :
    "You came and went tryin to imitate, thats the quickest way to disintegrate" -Talib Kweli



  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    30
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    hands down Cubase, pro tools , and logic sound better than FL. thats from expiriance

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,227
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
    In short...No, and easily proven with infallible null testing.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    2,112
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    It's like wearing boxers and briefs and asking other people "What's more comfortable?"

    They already ran a test which proved FL to be on the par with all other leading DAWs (look for benchmarks on google). But hey, if quietb4storm's "expiriance" tells him otherwise, perhaps it is a matter of personal taste. In which case, I suggest you do a simple comparison test using the same sounds.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Frankfurt / Germany
    Posts
    3,514
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 20 Times in 4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by [Shizo]
    They already ran a test which proved FL to be on the par with all other leading DAWs (look for benchmarks on google).
    "they"?!?

    mhhh... well, that's not the kind of people i tend to trust.


    different apps will sound different at the end. nobody just makes sound by simply adding some tracks or samples (i mean without processing them in some way). the naive tests you are mentioning have nothing to do with reality, they exclusively compare the pure mixing quality - and that's mathematically really just an addition - so there's not much to compare.

    but every app comes with different pitch algorithms (something used all the time), different EQs, different comps, different audio routing structures, different internal precision, different dithering, different sample-rate convertion and finally different, more or less "healthy" workflows (as some tend to emphasize overprocessing).

    all these factors will change the sound quality. yes, make a null test (but with real projects, not just a simple file playback) and you'll see they sound dramatically different.


    look what i found after googling a bit:

    a comparison of the pitching algorithms in different appz (you know, playing a sample at a lower note):
    http://www.simonv.com/tutorials/quality.php

    and that comparison of the internal sample-rate-converters:
    http://src.infinitewave.ca/


    and by the way,

    "I mean if you sequence the same sound source into both programs and then export into an .mp3"

    this is the most stupid thing one can do. never ever use lossy data compression when making sound (no matter what situation). always keep your material in 24bit wav files.

    simply forget the term "mp3" in audio production. convert your wavs to mp3s before uploading them to the internet, but try to not use them at home.
    Last edited by moses; 01-26-2008 at 05:06 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    4,765
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Good read

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,227
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
    Is 512 sinc not the most precise pitching algo?
    This would make FL not only render identical to everything else in a null test summing wave files, but have a edge in pitching as well.
    The tests I read at KVR also used effects(the same effects with identical settings), and all of the hosts still nulled out around -150db.

    All sequencers have different native effects with their own sound, but for instance, a Waves bundle sounds the same in all of them.
    Last edited by Mattman04; 01-26-2008 at 08:11 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by moses
    "they"?!?

    mhhh... well, that's not the kind of people i tend to trust.


    different apps will sound different at the end. nobody just makes sound by simply adding some tracks or samples (i mean without processing them in some way). the naive tests you are mentioning have nothing to do with reality, they exclusively compare the pure mixing quality - and that's mathematically really just an addition - so there's not much to compare.

    but every app comes with different pitch algorithms (something used all the time), different EQs, different comps, different audio routing structures, different internal precision, different dithering, different sample-rate convertion and finally different, more or less "healthy" workflows (as some tend to emphasize overprocessing).

    all these factors will change the sound quality. yes, make a null test (but with real projects, not just a simple file playback) and you'll see they sound dramatically different.

    and by the way,

    "I mean if you sequence the same sound source into both programs and then export into an .mp3"

    this is the most stupid thing one can do. never ever use lossy data compression when making sound (no matter what situation). always keep your material in 24bit wav files.

    simply forget the term "mp3" in audio production. convert your wavs to mp3s before uploading them to the internet, but try to not use them at home.
    I think you missing the whole point of his question, does Cubase sound better than FL Studio. From my experiance with the two I would have to say no. There isnt an audible different between that most users can hear. The pitch alogrithms that you speak of dont factor in as much as you think and most will hear a small difference between the EQs, Compressors, Reverb, and other FX (with compressors and reverb being the most obvious differences). If an example was done today with one audio track recorded on a neutral DAW (ala Pro Tools or Cool Edit) and then run both DAWs with that same recording, I can bet that there isnt much of a difference at all. I know for a fact that many unbiased audio magazines have discussed the dynamic range of a DAW and no where do they say there a big different between Product #1 with a 32-bit workframe or Product #2 with a 32-bit workframe. It all sounds basically the same.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    1,805
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moses

    "I mean if you sequence the same sound source into both programs and then export into an .mp3"

    this is the most stupid thing one can do. never ever use lossy data compression when making sound (no matter what situation). always keep your material in 24bit wav files.
    I do. I only convert to .mp3 for posting on the net where .wav isn't an option.
    : Myspace : PMP : Email :
    "You came and went tryin to imitate, thats the quickest way to disintegrate" -Talib Kweli



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Frankfurt / Germany
    Posts
    3,514
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 20 Times in 4 Posts
    [quote=Marol's Mom]If an example was done today with one audio track recorded on a neutral DAW (ala Pro Tools or Cool Edit) and then run both DAWs with that same recording, I can bet that there isnt much of a difference at all.[quote=Marol's Mom]

    that's why i wrote "all these factors will change the sound quality. yes, make a null test (but with real projects, not just a simple file playback) and you'll see they sound dramatically different."

    of course, simple playback sounds the same in any app. that's exactly the point i wasn't talking about (read it again).

    Quote Originally Posted by Marol's Mom
    I know for a fact that many unbiased audio magazines have discussed the dynamic range of a DAW

    haha! ok,

    1. no magazine is unbiased. they all earn their money with advertisments of products they write reviews about. want to be featured/interviewed in a magazine? simply pay for enough ad placement and you'll be asked.

    2. "magazines discussing the dynamic range of DAWs", no that's really the peak of ignorance. don't buy these magazine again.

    the dynamic range of DAWs is simply predefined by the internal precision specs. every 32bit fp audio will have exactly the same dynamic range. it is internally practically infinite (because of the floating point format). and has exactly 144dB of dynamic range when going to a 24bit integer format (or 96dB with 16bit). so, discussing "dynamic range" (as well as the impossible -150dB null tests mentioned above) in digital applications is a big stupid nonsense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marol's Mom
    and no where do they say there a big different between Product #1 with a 32-bit workframe or Product #2 with a 32-bit workframe. It all sounds basically the same.
    again, i don't think you read my post correctly. i listed the points that make a difference in my previous post. build the same PROJECT (many sampler, synths and fx) in 2 different applications and it will sound different at the end.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mattman04
    Is 512 sinc not the most precise pitching algo?
    it only means that it is a pretty long, 512 taps "sinc" type of filter (which is basically very good). but it doesn't mean the filter is well designed.

    the main problem is, nearly nobody renders in that quality - it's to slow, and works only offline. most use linear interpolation which tends to **** up everything with subtility (something you can't remove later) - all this sums up the more tracks/samples you use.
    Last edited by moses; 01-28-2008 at 05:53 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •