Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

General discussions on songwriting, mixing, music business and other music related topics.
User avatar
BriHar
Senior Member
Posts: 2159
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by BriHar »

Steve Helstrip wrote:
SteveInChicago wrote:Nonsense. Everybody knows that without these $2000 power cables, http://www.lessloss.com/dfpc-series-p-213.html#ref, there's no point to even getting out of bed to start mixing.
I've just bought this cable on your recommendation for the wife's beloved washing machine. I'm expecting seriously white whites, deeper blues, and generally all round cleaner clothes. Can't wait to see her face on Christmas morning.
She'll probably love it - thinking of all those boxing day sales and all that money to spend from the refund... :lol:
"...yes I think it can be easily done, just take everything down to Highway 61."

Sun Point Studio Turbenthal, Switzerland


Cubase Pro 10.5.20 - 64bit | Cubase AI 10.5 | WaveLab 9.0.10 - 64bit | PT10 | UR28M | UR44 | CMC-PD/4xFD/QC/AI/CH/TP | BCF2000 | Contour Shuttlexpress | Graphire Tablet | Cubendo Custom Keyboard | Lenovo E31 Workstation:Xeon E3-1225V2/3.2GHz; 14GB DDR3 SDRAM; 2x Intel-Flash520 SSD 180GB (C:/D:);1TB 7200rpm Sata3 (F:); DVD RW (E:); Ext. 3TB USB3 Freecom + WD 1TB; Nvidea GeForce GT 630 4GB DDR3 Video Ram AGP PCIE | Win 10 Pro 64 Bit

pwmspeed
New Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by pwmspeed »

lukasbrooklyn wrote: regarding hw: i keep having issues with setting the correct ping delay of my hardware units. i'd make sure to re-ping your processors. to me, your issue sounds a lot like your HW may be incorrectly compensated for, hence creating some undesirable phase shifts that may smear the sound.

and lastly, i'd really try running the test without hardware inserts alogether as well, because otherwise you're asking for 1:1 repeatability from hardware...
lukas, i have a pretty complex session here all mixed. it uses 28 outputs with quite some analog outboard. final summing is done via a studer 961 desk. i opened the session in cubase 7 and 8 pro, both have identical buffer settings. I re-recorded it through my lavry a/d literally one after the other with not a slightest change. the result is pretty shocking. the cubase 7 session sounds much better. more body and clarity. the 8 session sound washed out. up til now 3 mastering engineers have confirmed this.

i also did a quick internal mix with a different session using the digital summing and no outboard. same result. for me this is pretty bad since i am working for a mastering studio. i don't care about cpu-efficient performance. i need cubases old audio quality back in version 8. for now i am trying to give the upgrade back. shame because i would really need VCA faders....
Cubase 7.5 with CC121, Studer 962 Mixer, API 8200 Summing Modules, Lavry+RME converters, Various outboard including Urei, API, Lexicon, Audio & Design, Telefunken.

mbr
Member
Posts: 417
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by mbr »

pwmspeed wrote:Ok, feedback from one europes leading mastering studios chief mastering engineer. His quote: "The Cubase 8 mix lacks definition and body". Basically the same what I find here in my studio. I submitted three file pairs: 1) Stereo bounce of a single stereo track with just a volume change. 2) Stereo bounce of a single stereo track with a lexicon native reverb via fx send. 3) a complete mixdown from a project - basicalls 30 tracks mixed via my high end studer 961 console. All of them sound better in 7 than in 8. I am trying to inform Steinberg.

thank you for the feedback :ugeek:
Cubase 9.5 Recordings done @ 96 kHz / 64 Bit )

Win 7 64-bit SP1 ; i7 Intel @3.50 Hz ; 32 Gigs RAM
256 GB SSD OS ; 1 TB SSD for Recording ; 1 TB SSD for Sample Streaming

Soundcard - O1V96i
Yamaha Steinberg USB Driver V1.9.11 Firmware V1.02 Editor V1.0

UAD-2 (OCTO) ; CMC ( FD, CH, PD, TP, AI & QC )
Many hardware synths and sample libraries ; Millennia ; Midisport 8/8 ; BIG BEN Apogee

Forum member (old forums) since 2003

"The internet is a source of infinite information; the vast majority of which happens to be wrong"

lukasbrooklyn
Senior Member
Posts: 1049
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by lukasbrooklyn »

pwmspeed wrote:
lukasbrooklyn wrote: regarding hw: i keep having issues with setting the correct ping delay of my hardware units. i'd make sure to re-ping your processors. to me, your issue sounds a lot like your HW may be incorrectly compensated for, hence creating some undesirable phase shifts that may smear the sound.

and lastly, i'd really try running the test without hardware inserts alogether as well, because otherwise you're asking for 1:1 repeatability from hardware...
lukas, i have a pretty complex session here all mixed. it uses 28 outputs with quite some analog outboard. final summing is done via a studer 961 desk. i opened the session in cubase 7 and 8 pro, both have identical buffer settings. I re-recorded it through my lavry a/d literally one after the other with not a slightest change. the result is pretty shocking. the cubase 7 session sounds much better. more body and clarity. the 8 session sound washed out. up til now 3 mastering engineers have confirmed this.

i also did a quick internal mix with a different session using the digital summing and no outboard. same result. for me this is pretty bad since i am working for a mastering studio. i don't care about cpu-efficient performance. i need cubases old audio quality back in version 8. for now i am trying to give the upgrade back. shame because i would really need VCA faders....

i see. that's really quite complex and difficult to troubleshoot.

on first listen, my session that was just using two outboard compressors sounded somehow better to me with c8, but i didn't bother trying to null.
system// i7 4930k, w7 x64, c7.5.4, (c8)
audio// RME HDSP, SSL duende, audeze lcd-2, klein&hummel o300, adam s2x, lavry DA, avantone mixcubes, EL Fatso ...

http://www.lukasturza.com // http://www.snapmastering.com // music production / mixing / mastering [hybris, upbeats, noisia, rem koolhaas, czech television, havas, ogilvy, ...]

cubendo supercharged workflow ideas/threads of possible interest:
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtop ... 81&t=63450
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtop ... 81&t=38182
my supercharged workflow videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ellGhSdmXfk

Jeff Hayat
Senior Member
Posts: 1183
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:46 am
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by Jeff Hayat »

Steve Helstrip wrote:Lol. There's always one of these posts with each new version.
Told you!

http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtop ... ck#p403142

Jeff Hayat
Senior Member
Posts: 1183
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:46 am
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by Jeff Hayat »

ALL Cubase versions from SX2 > 7 null.

v2 nulls with v3
v3 nulls with v4
v4 nulls with v5
v5 nulls with v6
v6 nulls with v7

This is true for:

1) audio only projects
2) VST only projects
3) audio and VST projects

Yes, I have tested this. No, I did not do anything wrong; you can not possibly get an accidental null. To those of you who are hearing a difference from one version to the next, either a) you are hearing a difference from the eq curves in one version to the next, or b) you are just hearing things that don't really exist. But don't worry; this (meaning 'b') happens to many people.

A few reasons why you would not a get a null:

1) Pan law(s) set differently
2) Reverb somewhere in the project that has a random algo
3) A VST with a random algo (Zebra and Omnisphere are two good exs; Kontakt has a few random algos)
4) A plug with a random algo (some compressors, as one ex)
5) A ch strip with a random algo (yes, even inside your host)
6) Differing s.r./b.d.
7) RRs (if not reset prior to each mixdown)
8) Export vs. non-RT export

I have seen people - who felt strongly that they knew what they were doing - attempt to do null tests, but wind up doing them wrong. It's not rocket science, but it does need to be done correctly.

I cant imagine v7 does not null with v8

If someone wants to do a null test THE PROPER way, please go ahead. Otherwise, posting that one version sounds better than the next is a waste of everyone's time.

Cheers.

User avatar
NorthWood MediaWorks
Senior Member
Posts: 2339
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:51 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by NorthWood MediaWorks »

Its all totally subjective anyway, and physiological too... Well said Jeff 8-)
Robin
Visit Northwood Mediaworks!
| Cubase Pro 8.5.20 | Wavelab 8.0.3e | HSO | Padshop Pro | Win10pro 64 | i7 16Gb | UR44 | Angry Wife |
| OSX 10.12.6 | MacBookPro Retina 15 | Loads of Other Stuff |

pwmspeed
New Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by pwmspeed »

Well I have been working on a pro/mastering level for a long time - almost 15 years. Of course people will keep on believing that whatever industry does, it is always better. It makes me wonder why some people throw out "subjective", "cant the true", "8 sounds better" when 4 professionals (the chief mastering engineer mastered more than 75.000 tracks) independently come to a conclusion that there is a evident and pretty big decline in sound on cubase 8 pro. Guess what: I whished this was NOT true. I have opted for Cubase because it sounded great (up to 7.5.xx) Its the software I want to continue using. My aim is to make Cubase better, not worse. If some here are happy with less sound, fine. I am not.
Here are the soundfiles: 24 bit (recorded via Lavry A/D, no processing, no dithering)
Cubase 7 is at: http://markbihler.kliklak.net/cubase7.aiff
Cubase 8 is at: http://markbihler.kliklak.net/cubase8.aiff
Cubase 7.5 with CC121, Studer 962 Mixer, API 8200 Summing Modules, Lavry+RME converters, Various outboard including Urei, API, Lexicon, Audio & Design, Telefunken.

User avatar
Freddie H
Member
Posts: 510
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:59 am

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by Freddie H »

The Cubase 8 has a NEW audio engine and it sounds better.(* no I don't joking)

I don't care what makes it sound better or you all think and do not think. Its very easy to try out and investigate for anyone that have Cubase 7 or Cubase 7.5. Just open a old project and take a listen. If you can't hear and spot the different you should seriously think about seeing the doctor and check your ears. :idea:

The new audio engine in Cubase 8 are new,and are complete rebuild from scratch in 192kHz, 32bit floating. Its not the same engine as Cubase 7 and prior and it sounds different, better. The Cubase 7 audio-engine were also "updated" that you can read all technically about it. Do a Search! Cubase 7.0 and Cubase 7.5 were based on the same old audio engine.


Now you all can continue with your stupid jokes about "calculator" or what ever. Funny "jokes" some of them but you are wrong this time. In the mean time I will continue working making productions with new Cubase 8 that I really like even though with its imperfection and some minor VCA bugs.

Merry Christmas to you all! :) :D


Best Regards
Freddie
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!

MattJW
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 6:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by MattJW »

pwmspeed wrote:Well I have been working on a pro/mastering level for a long time - almost 15 years. Of course people will keep on believing that whatever industry does, it is always better. It makes me wonder why some people throw out "subjective", "cant the true", "8 sounds better" when 4 professionals (the chief mastering engineer mastered more than 75.000 tracks) independently come to a conclusion that there is a evident and pretty big decline in sound on cubase 8 pro. Guess what: I whished this was NOT true. I have opted for Cubase because it sounded great (up to 7.5.xx) Its the software I want to continue using. My aim is to make Cubase better, not worse. If some here are happy with less sound, fine. I am not.
Here are the soundfiles: 24 bit (recorded via Lavry A/D, no processing, no dithering)
Cubase 7 is at: http://markbihler.kliklak.net/cubase7.aiff
Cubase 8 is at: http://markbihler.kliklak.net/cubase8.aiff

Yes i can here a difference for sure but to me the Cubase 8 version sounds better, wider, more space around the sounds, more open..........................i'll get my coat :)
Cubase 8 Pro, Samplitude Pro X, Sonar Platinum (multiple DAW anxiety syndrome) UR824 Interface, Win 10, Intel i7 3770k 3.5GHZ, 8GB, UAD Quad, 2 Powercore PCI Cards, MCU, TC BMC-2 D/A, Dynaudio BM12a Monitors

pwmspeed
New Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by pwmspeed »

8: less body, snare washed out, transients sound squashed, more fake high end.
7: more body and sound integrity.
Cubase 7.5 with CC121, Studer 962 Mixer, API 8200 Summing Modules, Lavry+RME converters, Various outboard including Urei, API, Lexicon, Audio & Design, Telefunken.

lukasbrooklyn
Senior Member
Posts: 1049
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by lukasbrooklyn »

pwmspeed wrote:8: less body, snare washed out, transients sound squashed, more fake high end.
7: more body and sound integrity.
Interesting, ill take a listen (through Lavry DA, neumann speakers, treated room). there's a can of worms ready to be opened I hope you realise :) especially re: the possible argument that "if I can't spot a difference with my speakers, I dismiss the whole debate".

anyway, did you send the ping signals through your HW with C8? this to me is the number one suspect when hw is involved (esp. parallel compression).
system// i7 4930k, w7 x64, c7.5.4, (c8)
audio// RME HDSP, SSL duende, audeze lcd-2, klein&hummel o300, adam s2x, lavry DA, avantone mixcubes, EL Fatso ...

http://www.lukasturza.com // http://www.snapmastering.com // music production / mixing / mastering [hybris, upbeats, noisia, rem koolhaas, czech television, havas, ogilvy, ...]

cubendo supercharged workflow ideas/threads of possible interest:
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtop ... 81&t=63450
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtop ... 81&t=38182
my supercharged workflow videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ellGhSdmXfk

User avatar
Freddie H
Member
Posts: 510
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:59 am

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here

Post by Freddie H »

peakae wrote:Does it NULL ?
Well someone had to ask ;-)

No it does not null!

And its not little different, its massive different if you phase test and make a null test.


Best Regards
Freddie
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!

lukasbrooklyn
Senior Member
Posts: 1049
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here

Post by lukasbrooklyn »

Freddie H wrote:
peakae wrote:Does it NULL ?
Well someone had to ask ;-)

No it does not null!

And its not little different, its massive different if you phase test and make a null test.


Best Regards
Freddie
I am ever more confused if this is a social experiment.
system// i7 4930k, w7 x64, c7.5.4, (c8)
audio// RME HDSP, SSL duende, audeze lcd-2, klein&hummel o300, adam s2x, lavry DA, avantone mixcubes, EL Fatso ...

http://www.lukasturza.com // http://www.snapmastering.com // music production / mixing / mastering [hybris, upbeats, noisia, rem koolhaas, czech television, havas, ogilvy, ...]

cubendo supercharged workflow ideas/threads of possible interest:
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtop ... 81&t=63450
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtop ... 81&t=38182
my supercharged workflow videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ellGhSdmXfk

User avatar
Jarno
Senior Member
Posts: 1456
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by Jarno »

Freddie H wrote:The new audio engine in Cubase 8 are new,and are complete rebuild from scratch in 192kHz, 32bit floating.
Cubase audio engine is 192k only if you set your project to 192k. And all correctly implemented digital audio engines sound the same. Period. Fact. If they sound different, there's something seriously wrong with one. When it comes to stock plugins etc, that's a different story, though.
pwmspeed wrote:when 4 professionals (the chief mastering engineer mastered more than 75.000 tracks) independently come to a conclusion that there is a evident and pretty big decline in sound on cubase 8 pro.
Yes and there's world-class producers (with gazillions #1 hits under their belt) who thinks SATA drive sounds better than USB drive and similar stuff. Go figure.
Cubase 8 Pro/7/4/SX1/VST3.7 | Waves Gold | Melodyne | PC i7-4770/8G/2xSSD/Win7 64 | MacMini | Frontier Tranzport
Tascam DM-4800 | Soundcraft Spirit Studio 16 | dbx231 | Genelec 1032A | KEF C15 | Auratone 5S | Samson S-phone
Yamaha REV500/SPX990 | Alesis Midiverb4 | Roland SDE-330 | Pearl Echo Orbit | Aphex 109 x2 | TL-Audio C5021
Alesis 3630 | AudioLogic MT66 | Joemeek VC1Q | dbx386 | Focusrite VoiceMaster | Line6 PodXt/BassPodXt | Boss GT-3
Roland TD8/TD5/JV2080/SC55 | UseAudio Plugiator | E-mu ProteusXR | Akai S-900/AX73 | M-Audio Keystation
Martin/Taylor/Ortega/ESP/Fender/Line6 guitars/basses | Pearl/Olympic by Premier drumkits | Custom Roland V-drum kit
AKG D112/CK77 | Calrec CM1050C | Earthworks QTC30 | EV RE20/Spherex920 | Neumann M147 | Pearl CR57
Peavey PVM45 | RØDE NT2/NT55 | Sennheiser MD441/MD421/e606 | Shure SM7/SM57/SM58/BETA57/BETA58 ...
... Saeco Odea Giro Espresso machine | BMW Z3 roadster | American Pit Bull Terrier

User avatar
peakae
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 8:15 pm
Location: Bedroom
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by peakae »

I will do a null test when I got some time to nerd away :-)
There are so many factors that come in to play, like instrument tracks being Midi and not being sample accurate. Automation same problem. None linear fx like chorus and what not. I'm not saying I don't believe you, just saying I want to do my own test, well and for the fun :-)
Anyway it should really not sound any different, but with all the tinkering in the audio engine it just might. Let's have an open mind and test ourselves.
Cubase Pro 10, Wavelab Elements 9, I7 3770K , win10x64, 16Gb Ram, RME Raydat, Steinberg MR816x, Motu 828mkII, Behringer ADA8200, Yamaha moXF6, Steinberg UR242, Yamaha THR 10, Grace Design m900, CMC TP, CMC CH.

User avatar
peakae
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 8:15 pm
Location: Bedroom
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by peakae »

Ok so i did a null test on a song i just wrote.
Did a mixdown in Cubase 7.5
Did a mixdown in Cubase 8.0
Imported the 2 tracks into a new project in Cubase 8.0
Reversed phase (Ø) on 1 track
Did a mixdown, and imported the Null_Sum file again.
Here are the stats for that file:
-------------------------------------------
Title;Statistics - "nullSum1"
Date;Friday, December 19, 2014
Loudness_Value;-80.00 LUFS
Loudness_Range;0.00 LU
Max_True_Peak_Level;-72.12 dBTP
Max_Momentary_Loudness;-80.00 LUFS
Max_Short_Term_Loudness;-80.00 LUFS
Sample Rate;44.100 kHz
Average RMS (AES-17) Left;-oo dB
Average RMS (AES-17) Right;-oo dB
Max. RMS Left;-100.72 dB
Max. RMS Right;-100.72 dB
Max. RMS;-100.72 dB
Min. Sample Value Left;-73.17 dB
Min. Sample Value Right;-73.21 dB
Max. Sample Value Left;-75.28 dB
Max. Sample Value Right;-75.28 dB
Peak Amplitude Left;-73.17 dB
Peak Amplitude Right;-73.21 dB
True Peak Left;-72.12 dB
True Peak Right;-72.15 dB
DC Offset Left;-oo dB
DC Offset Right;-oo dB
Resolution Left;24 Bit
Resolution Right;24 Bit
Estimated Pitch Left;5308.8Hz/E7
Estimated Pitch Right;5373.8Hz/E7
-------------------------------------------
Cubase Pro 10, Wavelab Elements 9, I7 3770K , win10x64, 16Gb Ram, RME Raydat, Steinberg MR816x, Motu 828mkII, Behringer ADA8200, Yamaha moXF6, Steinberg UR242, Yamaha THR 10, Grace Design m900, CMC TP, CMC CH.

pwmspeed
New Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by pwmspeed »

Again the vital info: The files are NOT summed in Cubase. Its my high-end Studer 961 console with an API 8200 submixer. Both sessions are absolutely the same, literally recorded one after the other - time in between was prolly 1 minute. Not a slightest change on ANY outboard knob or fader. Cubases audio engine adresses in both sessions the 28 outputs of my hardware. (2 Lavry Stereo DAs, 3 RME Multifaces). All buffer settings are the same. On the digital EQ side I rely on Cubases Channel EQs. The difference could be the audio engine, a different sounding channel eq (Steinberg changed the a very things like low cuts) or both.

And again: I also did a quick digital mix in Cubase (on another song) with the summing being done in Cubase. Same sonic result as with the analog summing. Cubase 7 has body, depth and more precision. Cubase 8 sounds flakey.
Cubase 7.5 with CC121, Studer 962 Mixer, API 8200 Summing Modules, Lavry+RME converters, Various outboard including Urei, API, Lexicon, Audio & Design, Telefunken.

User avatar
sycophant
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:50 am

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by sycophant »

pwmspeed wrote:Cubase 8 sounds flakey.
So we have a beta audio engine?

Jeff Hayat
Senior Member
Posts: 1183
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:46 am
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by Jeff Hayat »

sycophant wrote:
pwmspeed wrote:Cubase 8 sounds flakey.
So we have a beta audio engine?
More like a croissant audio engine.

HUGE, HUGE facepalm to everything after my post.

First off, even if there was a difference, that difference would be so small, there is no way any human being would hear it.

Secondly:

YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG

Please someone do this:

Launch v7
Import stems (ensuring the project is set to the same sample rate as the audio files)
All faders at 0
Master fader at 0
No plugs anywhere
Check to make sure the master fader does not clip. If it does, bring it down so there is no clipping
Perform non-rt export at the project sample rate and bit depth
Close v7

Launch v8
Import the same stems (ensuring the project is set to the same sample rate as the audio files)
All faders at 0
Master fader at 0 (if you have brought down the master fader in C7, bring down the master fader here the exact same amount)
No plugs anywhere
Perform non-rt export at the project sample rate and bit depth

Import both the v7 and v8 audio files. Flip phase on one of the channels. Ensure all of the other channels are muted or disabled. Click the Peak Meter Value area of the master fader so it shows minus inf. Play. Do you see anything on the master fader?

THIS IS HOW YOU DO A NULL TEST PROPERLY - YOU DO NOT DO A NULL TEST WITH PLUGS, AND BY SENDING AUDIO TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD AND THEN BACK IN, USING DESKS AND CONVERTERS AND EXTERNAL HW

User avatar
MrSoundman
Senior Member
Posts: 2575
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by MrSoundman »

I've found the problem -- it's the new GUI, and here's the subjective scientific proof!

The Cubase 7 GUI sounds so much better .... tighter bass, the cohesive lower mids giving way to the expansive midrange soundstage ... all these things combine to provide the perfect foundation for the exquisitely detailed upper mids, (with just that indescribable, yet essential hint of toughness around 6.82kHz), opening up to the final touch of air that is the silky, esoteric and phase-coherent highs.

The Cubase 8 GUI, on the other hand, sounds like a geriatric cat's dying fart into a noisy bean-bag.
Windows 10 • Cubase 10.5.20 • WaveLab 10.0.40 • SpectraLayers 6.0.30 • HALion 6.4.0 • Groove Agent 5.0.20 • Midex

User avatar
Mauri
Senior Member
Posts: 1133
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:17 am
Location: Adelaide AU
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by Mauri »

MrSoundman wrote:I've found the problem The Cubase 8 GUI, on the other hand, sounds like a geriatric cat's dying fart into a noisy bean-bag.
:lol: :lol: :lol: !
Cubase Pro 10.5 x64 with jBridge | WaveLab Elements 10 | i7 5930K @ 4.6GHz (stable) | ASUS X99 Pro | 32GB RAM | | W10 x64 Dual Boot on 2 SSDs plus 3 SSDs for samples and project/audio files | Fractal Design Define R5 case | Noctua NH-D15 | AMD Radeon RX 580 | Vox ToneLab SE | Mackie HR624 MKII | 2 x UAD2 Solo PCIe | RME HDSPe AIO | 2 x 24" LED monitors...

User avatar
peakae
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 8:15 pm
Location: Bedroom
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by peakae »

I think my last posting speaks for itself. I even took the sum file and did a normalization to see what I could pull up. The was a glitch that resulted in the -72dB peak, that glitch was 30dB. So Cubase 7.5 and 8.0 absolutely null. Phew you guys had me going there for a second.
Cubase Pro 10, Wavelab Elements 9, I7 3770K , win10x64, 16Gb Ram, RME Raydat, Steinberg MR816x, Motu 828mkII, Behringer ADA8200, Yamaha moXF6, Steinberg UR242, Yamaha THR 10, Grace Design m900, CMC TP, CMC CH.

User avatar
sycophant
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:50 am

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by sycophant »

peakae wrote:I think my last posting speaks for itself. I even took the sum file and did a normalization to see what I could pull up. The was a glitch that resulted in the -72dB peak, that glitch was 30dB. So Cubase 7.5 and 8.0 absolutely null. Phew you guys had me going there for a second.
Any differences will only exist in the live playback system, which has nothing at all to do with the rendering of any files, real time or otherwise.

User avatar
HowlingUlf
Senior Member
Posts: 2202
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here at first sight

Post by HowlingUlf »

where is JP22 now?
Gothenburg, Sweden
Steinberg Cubase Pro 10.5 | Steinberg WaveLab 10 | Steinberg Absolute 4 | Steinberg SpectralLayers 6
Win10 63.5 Pro | ASUS ATX Z170-P | Intel Core i7-6700K Skylake | 32GB RAM |
Nektar Panorama P6 | | Steinberg Midex8 | Steinberg UR824 |

Post Reply

Return to “Steinberg Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests