best sounding software

Recording Techniques, People Skills, Gear, Recording Spaces, Computers, and DIY

Moderators: drumsound, tomb

Post Reply

which sounds best in analog transfers

Poll ended at Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:01 am

digital performer
3
30%
sonar
1
10%
pro tools
4
40%
tracktion
2
20%
 
Total votes: 10

samezvous
audio school graduate
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 1:20 am
Location: downingtown,pa.
Contact:

best sounding software

Post by samezvous » Fri Aug 18, 2006 3:01 am

i am strictly transferring analog to digital for archiving. which stand alone program has the truest sounding transfers and retains the greatest depth and accuracy to the original analog signal?
eli

User avatar
Cellotron
tinnitus
Posts: 1025
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 9:49 pm
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Contact:

Post by Cellotron » Fri Aug 18, 2006 6:33 am

The answer isn't on your list -
it's SAWStudio.

http://www.sawstudio.com

Best regards,
Steve Berson

User avatar
inverseroom
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5031
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 8:37 am
Location: Ithaca, NY
Contact:

Post by inverseroom » Fri Aug 18, 2006 6:41 am

There is a very persuasive school of thought that says they all sound exactly the same.

User avatar
scott anthony
suffering 'studio suck'
Posts: 472
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 1:00 pm
Location: jersey
Contact:

Post by scott anthony » Fri Aug 18, 2006 6:44 am

Cellotron wrote:The answer isn't on your list -
it's SAWStudio.

http://www.sawstudio.com

Best regards,
Steve Berson
Agreed.

But if all you are doing is archiving, I don't think the engine of the software comes into play. They should all just catch the data from your soundcard and dump it on the hard drive without additional molestation...

User avatar
Russian Recording
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 752
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 2:28 pm
Location: Bloomington, IN
Contact:

Post by Russian Recording » Fri Aug 18, 2006 7:13 am

Your list is rather small and incomplete.

I am the Audio Preservation Engineer for the Indiana University School of Music Digital Audio Archive PRoject (APE for IUSOMDAAP). I archive analog recordings all day for preservation.

First of all, your machine, wiring and converters will make up 99.9% of the sound of your transfer, not the software.

I use Steinberg's Wavelab 6.0 for capturing the audio. It is very easy to use, powerful and has many features hat make it suitable for archiving and preservation work, including good BWAV support and AES-31 support.

If you are concerned with preservation and making faithful transfers of your source recordings, you need to invest money in your A/D, your tape machine and your wiring. As far as the machine goes, sound quality is not the only issue, you also need to consider a delicate transport if transfering old Acetate tapes or tapes that are less the 1.5 mil. in thickness.

best of luck,
mike

User avatar
Cellotron
tinnitus
Posts: 1025
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 9:49 pm
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Contact:

Post by Cellotron » Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:11 am

scott anthony wrote:
Cellotron wrote:The answer isn't on your list -
it's SAWStudio.

http://www.sawstudio.com

Best regards,
Steve Berson
Agreed.

But if all you are doing is archiving, I don't think the engine of the software comes into play. They should all just catch the data from your soundcard and dump it on the hard drive without additional molestation...
True dat!

It's only with further manipulations / processing that the differences between DAW apps come into play.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

tubejay
pushin' record
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 3:44 pm
Location: WI United States

Post by tubejay » Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:46 pm

I don't know anyone that can hear the difference in software... I'd say go for the system that's easiest to use AND supports the converters of your choice.

earl parameter
buyin' gear
Posts: 514
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 2:36 am

Post by earl parameter » Thu Aug 24, 2006 6:08 pm

i really don?t like seeing this. other people are going to read what you have posted up here and take it as true. i have personally tested multiple pieces of software on the same machine and the same converters and it all sounds different. some of it isn't that different from maybe one or two others, but some of it is very different. i don't make audio software myself so i can't really begin to explain how or what it is, but here is something that everyone can do for free. go download a bunch of different mp3 codec's and try each one. they are also different and i can only imagine that something similar is built into each piece of audio soft. i believe it is referred to as an audio engine, and each company has to build their own in order to turn the numbers into something to feed the converters (similar to a game engine?). i would imagine different types of code and even plugin architecture can impart a sound of its own as well. companies have demos for a reason so go and get them all and try them out and see what you think.



logic like 5.7 or something just before they went all mac was one of the best sounding

traktion 1.0 sucked hard. thanks for giving it out free though. it was a nice idea

tested sawstudio a while back and its alright but it was years ago and a little overwhelming

soundforge is alright use it for a two track, but it could be better

cubase is just alright and i didn't like the work flow at all. to slow to move around in there

wavlab is just ok to me.

fl studio is not so good but better then it used to be

dp on a mac a couple years back was one of my favorites. don't know what its like these days

pt is just pt it was never really anything special

the early acid sucked (the time stretch algorithm at the time was not so good) haven't tried it after like version 2

i currently use sonar but all the versions before 2.0 sucked the life out of everything.



you should just try it and decide for yourself. do some a/b tests with the same source, and yes dithering and converters and everything else matters to. more even, but don't just assume that every piece of software is transparent because its software.


and i didn't vote, because what i say shouldn't matter. get some demos and decide for yourself, and don't believe everything you read online. even me.

steven

User avatar
effector
takin' a dinner break
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 3:50 pm

Post by effector » Thu Aug 24, 2006 7:24 pm

it sounds like you're evaluating several different variables at once. like when you're talking about the time-stretching algorithm in acid, that's dsp, which isn't the same as simply recording a track and playing it back. recording a single track and playing it back is going to sound the same in pretty much any program, although i guess you could say that different DAWs have different architectures in the 'summing bus'. then, of course, you could evaluate the dsp in a particular DAW, but that's going to depend alot on what plugins you use. you could compare plugin architectures, which i guess in a way relates to which DAW you use (since each one generally has it's own plugin type.)

but i guess what i'm saying is, be sure you're comparing apples to apples.

earl parameter
buyin' gear
Posts: 514
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 2:36 am

Post by earl parameter » Thu Aug 24, 2006 9:56 pm

so i guess i forgot to put an "and" in that sentence.

(AND the time stretch algorithm at the time was not so good)





it is all apples to apples - i'm not a child

User avatar
effector
takin' a dinner break
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 3:50 pm

Post by effector » Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:37 pm

flstudio sounds like ass, i agree.

User avatar
Mark Alan Miller
dead but not forgotten
Posts: 2097
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 6:58 pm
Location: Western MA
Contact:

Post by Mark Alan Miller » Fri Aug 25, 2006 8:58 pm

IMO, anything that records a digital audio stream, with no DSP, will be the same. And dependent on the A/D and clock for the "sound".

As long as it's all about data capture, get whatever software is convenient and/or you like the GUI of, and the best sounding A/D to your ears.

IMO.
he took a duck in the face at two and hundred fifty knots.

http://www.radio-valkyrie.com/ao/aoindex.htm - download the new record (free is an option!) or get it on CD.

User avatar
theistheman
pushin' record
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 8:44 pm
Location: Edgemont, SD/Chicago, IL

Post by theistheman » Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:11 pm

oregon trail.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests