So for you recording guys. Do you find one DAW sounds better

[Vrad]

I've been a software developer for around 20 years and my better judgement tells me that commercially available applications such as Pro-Tools, Logic, Cubase/Nuendo etc.. should really all sound the same since at the core level, you're just streaming 1's and 0's to disk.

On the flip-side of that, as a programmer I also know how bugs and or optimizations can influence the data as it's rendered. Let's face it, there's a lot going on in these packages.

With that said, I've been using Cubase for about 10-15 years and this weekend purchased Logic Pro X, because my mixes were always lacking something. To my ears, Logic sounds different. It's warmer and sweeter with all other things the same (interface, monitoring equipment). I'm wondering if anyone else has observed this. I've seen some heated arguments on this subject matter, but I'm pretty sure about what I hear.

So uhm.. yeah...

Edit... quick test.
So I just did a quick test. The channel volume for both DAW's were set to -8.1 (Logic) and -8.2(Cubase). One stereo track. Same preset, everything is the same. No post processing. Both exported out to a 96kHz .aiff file for consistency's sake.

Cubase
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ynd46pbvynik8 ... 20Test.aif

Logic
https://www.dropbox.com/s/bne339psph5hk ... 20Test.aif

Judge for yourself.

 

[Meathead]

I've read that recording software doesn't all sound the same.
I remember years ago guys with sensitive bat-like hearing swore that Samplitude was the best sounding software for audio.

 

[voodooradio1]

I use Logic Pro on a Mac. Before that I used reaper on a PC. I seem to get much better results with Mac and Logic. I think the biggest reasons for that is that things seem much easier for me with the Mac, and logic has a layout that is easy for me to relate to. I'm no computer wiz, so having a setup that works every time with zero hassle means more time spent on actual tracking.
So to sort of answer your question, I don't think there is one that sounds better than another, but having the rig that is right for you will definitely yield better results.

 

[Anonymous]

I can't even tell a modeler from a real amp and you're asking me if one DAW sounds better than another?

Steve

 

[Vrad]

I've read that recording software doesn't all sound the same.
I remember years ago guys with sensitive bat-like hearing swore that Samplitude was the best sounding software for audio.

Yeah I remember reading that a WHILE ago..

 

[Vrad]

So I just did a very very quick and dirty test. Check out the results.

 

[Vrad]

I use Logic Pro on a Mac. Before that I used reaper on a PC. I seem to get much better results with Mac and Logic. I think the biggest reasons for that is that things seem much easier for me with the Mac, and logic has a layout that is easy for me to relate to. I'm no computer wiz, so having a setup that works every time with zero hassle means more time spent on actual tracking.
So to sort of answer your question, I don't think there is one that sounds better than another, but having the rig that is right for you will definitely yield better results.

You probably can't go wrong with any of the major DAW's. Both Cubase and Logic operate flawlessly for me and the functionality is similar. So for me, it comes down to how it mixes things down and sums the audio. I don't want to believe that there is a difference, but there seems to be.

 

[Vrad]

I can't even tell a modeler from a real amp and you're asking me if one DAW sounds better than another?

Steve

HAHAHAHAHAH! Steve! Good point!

 

[Vrad]

Yes, they do sound different. Logic is awesome.

It's works great.

 

[Black Sabbath]

I've been a software developer for around 20 years and my better judgement tells me that commercially available applications such as Pro-Tools, Logic, Cubase/Nuendo etc.. should really all sound the same since at the core level, you're just streaming 1's and 0's to disk.

Judge for yourself.

But Vrad, I am a SAN senior storage engineer for 21+ years now and you are forgetting what all those bits and bytes represent by those entire one or a zero 8 bit blocks (on or off).

You must also consider that the streaming algorithm that is the central core engine may cause more or less "miss-matched frame alignments" and there may or may not (depending on the programmer’s OOP logical constructor and destructor skills) detect all correctly and cause similar to biasing a tube amp, cross over distortion.

Go with any Roland DAW, you can’t go wrong with Roland.

 

[Vrad]

I've been a software developer for around 20 years and my better judgement tells me that commercially available applications such as Pro-Tools, Logic, Cubase/Nuendo etc.. should really all sound the same since at the core level, you're just streaming 1's and 0's to disk.

Judge for yourself.

But Vrad, I am a SAN senior storage engineer for 21+ years now and you are forgetting what all those bits and bytes represent by those entire one or a zero 8 bit blocks (on or off).

You must also consider that the streaming algorithm that is the central core engine may cause more or less "miss-matched frame alignments" and there may or may not (depending on the programmer’s OOP logical constructor and destructor skills) detect all correctly and cause similar to biasing a tube amp, cross over distortion.

Go with any Roland DAW, you can’t go wrong with Roland.

You can offset a bit in one of your loops in the code while reading and not get the right data also... either way... There's room for DAW's sounding different. The clips prove it.

 

[Vrad]

So guys, I will leave you with one more parting thought.

I imported both 96kHz AIFF files back into logic to see the waveform and see if I can adjust the volume to match. Afterwards, I'd try to compare the actual recording.

Observe the perceived amplitude difference between the two files. The larger one is the file recorded and exported in Logic.
The next thing I did was balance the levels to see if they sound similar or different. Notice the faders, and how much I had to cut to get the same volume. Notice the meters showing approximately the same volume. Guess what? They sound different. Even with the what appears to be same level of loudness, the file recorded in Logic is considerably louder and in your face.

What does this prove? I'm not sure exactly. Not sure if one is better or worse per se. But they are different and the results generated are different.

 

[Meathead]

So guys, I will leave you with one more parting thought.

I imported both 96kHz AIFF files back into logic to see the waveform and see if I can adjust the volume to match. Afterwards, I'd try to compare the actual recording.

Observe the perceived amplitude difference between the two files. The larger one is the file recorded and exported in Logic.
The next thing I did was balance the levels to see if they sound similar or different. Notice the faders, and how much I had to cut to get the same volume. Notice the meters showing approximately the same volume. Guess what? They sound different. Even with the what appears to be same level of loudness, the file recorded in Logic is considerably louder and in your face.

What does this prove? I'm not sure exactly. Not sure if one is better or worse per se. But they are different and the results generated are different.

Maybe in your face is not as good..and Cubase smoothing the sound is actually more like the natural sound that was recorded....it's an audio paradigm, I mean paradox.

 

[Vrad]

So guys, I will leave you with one more parting thought.

I imported both 96kHz AIFF files back into logic to see the waveform and see if I can adjust the volume to match. Afterwards, I'd try to compare the actual recording.

Observe the perceived amplitude difference between the two files. The larger one is the file recorded and exported in Logic.
The next thing I did was balance the levels to see if they sound similar or different. Notice the faders, and how much I had to cut to get the same volume. Notice the meters showing approximately the same volume. Guess what? They sound different. Even with the what appears to be same level of loudness, the file recorded in Logic is considerably louder and in your face.

What does this prove? I'm not sure exactly. Not sure if one is better or worse per se. But they are different and the results generated are different.

Maybe in your face is not as good..and Cubase smoothing the sound is actually more like the natural sound that was recorded....it's an audio paradigm, I mean paradox.

Yep. Some people may call it "neutral" or "transparent". So like I said, not sure if it's better per se but it's definitely different.

 

[TheMagicEight]

So guys, I will leave you with one more parting thought.

I imported both 96kHz AIFF files back into logic to see the waveform and see if I can adjust the volume to match. Afterwards, I'd try to compare the actual recording.

Observe the perceived amplitude difference between the two files. The larger one is the file recorded and exported in Logic.
The next thing I did was balance the levels to see if they sound similar or different. Notice the faders, and how much I had to cut to get the same volume. Notice the meters showing approximately the same volume. Guess what? They sound different. Even with the what appears to be same level of loudness, the file recorded in Logic is considerably louder and in your face.

What does this prove? I'm not sure exactly. Not sure if one is better or worse per se. But they are different and the results generated are different.

Interesting that the meter reads the same.

FWIW, when I put the files side by side and used my ears to match volume, I couldn't hear a difference.

 

[Dented42ford]

As a pro audio engineer who works primarily with digital formats, I gotta be honest with you guys, this one has been done to death...

[pretty much] ALL MAJOR DAW'S NULL*.

What I mean is, barring user error, they all sound the same when just playing back and/or exporting raw audio files. There can be cases where they don't - the ubiquitous "pan law" argument comes up again and again - but when it comes to just summing audio, they all do it the same way. It is basic addition, seriously - adding sample values together. Gain in the digital domain is the same thing - just adding or subtracting sample values.

Now, when you get into using plugins or processing of any sort (especially sample rate conversion and dither), that can all go out the window - but as far as straight handling of audio, all DAW's work exactly the same way.

But Vrad, I am a SAN senior storage engineer for 21+ years now and you are forgetting what all those bits and bytes represent by those entire one or a zero 8 bit blocks (on or off).

You must also consider that the streaming algorithm that is the central core engine may cause more or less "miss-matched frame alignments" and there may or may not (depending on the programmer’s OOP logical constructor and destructor skills) detect all correctly and cause similar to biasing a tube amp, cross over distortion.

Go with any Roland DAW, you can’t go wrong with Roland.

Not to dismiss your experience, but one of the main design goals of any audio software maker is to make the program sample accurate. This means no page overruns, no frame alignment issues on export, and no other mucking about that might affect the integrity of the original WAV/AIFF file. All of the major DAWs are now sample accurate - Logic, Cubase/Nuendo, Pro Tools, Samplitude, Sequoia, Live, Sonar, and so on. As I said above, dealing with audio is just addition - the logic involved is pretty rudimentary (simple addition), as long as no other processing is done. So, as long as you are just adding together and/or exporting audio - and even panning, as long as the pan laws are the same, since that is just a channel-specific form of gain - then the audio will null.

There is no "logical construction or destruction" going on in an all-digital audio summing engine. It really is just addition! Though that does fall apart once any DSP starts getting applied - which is where the real sonic differences between the DAW's start to pop up.

* To null means to cancel with a phase inversion. If you invert the phase of one of the files, make sure it is lined up with single-sample accuracy, and hear silence on playback, then the audio is IDENTICAL. This is a scientific fact. If it is off by even a single sample, or any amount of volume or any other characteristic, then it won't null.

Also, Roland doesn't make a DAW anymore...

I've read that recording software doesn't all sound the same.
I remember years ago guys with sensitive bat-like hearing swore that Samplitude was the best sounding software for audio.

This one has also been disproven time and again. Samplitude/Sequoia have a lot of things going for them, but a "higher quality audio engine" isn't one of them. It is a sign of how brilliant that marketing plan was that this rumor keeps popping up again and again - kudos, Magix, kudos.

To the OP: I'm pretty sure I know why you think the Logic sound is a little "warmer/fatter/better", and it has nothing really to do with the "sound of the software". You probably left the "normalize" option on upon Logic export - it is on by default, while in Cubase it is off by default. It is really just a volume difference. Even 0.1db will fool your ears into thinking that the louder one sounds "better", especially in the low end - it is basic physics and psychology.

Also, I take it from "same preset" you were using a plugin. Logic and Cubase DO handle plugins very slightly differently. You also performed it twice, it seems - though I suppose you could have cut up the Cubase track to get the Logic track, but comparing the waveforms (in Wavelab) it seems like you played it differently. That ALONE could be the difference you hear, and would also make matching the volumes very difficult without using some sort of automated process.

[/end rant]

In the end, my advice is to just use whatever DAW inspires you!

(personally, I use'm all, but find Logic X, Cubase, Reason, and Live to be the most inspiring)

 

[fluff191]

I absolutely noticed a difference moving from Reaper to Logic. Maybe its because Logic uses the Core Audio instead of ASIO drivers or something I dunno, but there was a huge improvement to my mixes.

 

[NS10Fan]

I absolutely noticed a difference moving from Reaper to Logic. Maybe its because Logic uses the Core Audio instead of ASIO drivers or something I dunno, but there was a huge improvement to my mixes.

Don't give the software the credit. I'm sure you just got better!

I dunno what's happening in the original test, but something seems fishy beyond the .1 discrepency. The logic mix is considerably louder if all things are equal, but I'm questioning that pretty hard. I don't have much experience outside of cubase/reaper/pt, but I've never heard anything that obvious when doing bounces. Pan law maybe? Dunno.

Either way, something's happening!

 

[Jofipe]

This is ridiculous... a DAW simply maps out the audio converted by you A/D to your HD. That would be the same as asking "Does one hard drive sound different from another?" No.

Sound critical creterias are: Preamps, converters, format, plugin algorithms and so on... a DAW is just a steering wheel, it doesnt determine how powerful the car is.

 

[sixstringking713]

As a pro audio engineer who works primarily with digital formats, I gotta be honest with you guys, this one has been done to death...

[pretty much] ALL MAJOR DAW'S NULL*.

What I mean is, barring user error, they all sound the same when just playing back and/or exporting raw audio files. There can be cases where they don't - the ubiquitous "pan law" argument comes up again and again - but when it comes to just summing audio, they all do it the same way. It is basic addition, seriously - adding sample values together. Gain in the digital domain is the same thing - just adding or subtracting sample values.

Now, when you get into using plugins or processing of any sort (especially sample rate conversion and dither), that can all go out the window - but as far as straight handling of audio, all DAW's work exactly the same way.

But Vrad, I am a SAN senior storage engineer for 21+ years now and you are forgetting what all those bits and bytes represent by those entire one or a zero 8 bit blocks (on or off).

You must also consider that the streaming algorithm that is the central core engine may cause more or less "miss-matched frame alignments" and there may or may not (depending on the programmer’s OOP logical constructor and destructor skills) detect all correctly and cause similar to biasing a tube amp, cross over distortion.

Go with any Roland DAW, you can’t go wrong with Roland.

Not to dismiss your experience, but one of the main design goals of any audio software maker is to make the program sample accurate. This means no page overruns, no frame alignment issues on export, and no other mucking about that might affect the integrity of the original WAV/AIFF file. All of the major DAWs are now sample accurate - Logic, Cubase/Nuendo, Pro Tools, Samplitude, Sequoia, Live, Sonar, and so on. As I said above, dealing with audio is just addition - the logic involved is pretty rudimentary (simple addition), as long as no other processing is done. So, as long as you are just adding together and/or exporting audio - and even panning, as long as the pan laws are the same, since that is just a channel-specific form of gain - then the audio will null.

There is no "logical construction or destruction" going on in an all-digital audio summing engine. It really is just addition! Though that does fall apart once any DSP starts getting applied - which is where the real sonic differences between the DAW's start to pop up.

* To null means to cancel with a phase inversion. If you invert the phase of one of the files, make sure it is lined up with single-sample accuracy, and hear silence on playback, then the audio is IDENTICAL. This is a scientific fact. If it is off by even a single sample, or any amount of volume or any other characteristic, then it won't null.

Also, Roland doesn't make a DAW anymore...

I've read that recording software doesn't all sound the same.
I remember years ago guys with sensitive bat-like hearing swore that Samplitude was the best sounding software for audio.

This one has also been disproven time and again. Samplitude/Sequoia have a lot of things going for them, but a "higher quality audio engine" isn't one of them. It is a sign of how brilliant that marketing plan was that this rumor keeps popping up again and again - kudos, Magix, kudos.

To the OP: I'm pretty sure I know why you think the Logic sound is a little "warmer/fatter/better", and it has nothing really to do with the "sound of the software". You probably left the "normalize" option on upon Logic export - it is on by default, while in Cubase it is off by default. It is really just a volume difference. Even 0.1db will fool your ears into thinking that the louder one sounds "better", especially in the low end - it is basic physics and psychology.

Also, I take it from "same preset" you were using a plugin. Logic and Cubase DO handle plugins very slightly differently. You also performed it twice, it seems - though I suppose you could have cut up the Cubase track to get the Logic track, but comparing the waveforms (in Wavelab) it seems like you played it differently. That ALONE could be the difference you hear, and would also make matching the volumes very difficult without using some sort of automated process.

[/end rant]

In the end, my advice is to just use whatever DAW inspires you!

(personally, I use'm all, but find Logic X, Cubase, Reason, and Live to be the most inspiring)

I'm not a professional by definition but I do have experience in programming, dsp, and audio mixing. I agree with your post that any of the big-name DAW programs should be pretty close in how they process raw audio (and if there is a slight difference, it would not be detectable to a human ear). However, once DSP is introduced in the signal chain with plugins etc, that completely changes the story.