Page 3 of 4

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

Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 11:57 am
by pwmspeed
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

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[/quote]

Great. I am a mixdown engineer, not a null-ing scientist. All which is evident is that a session in Cubase 7 sound better under 100% the same circumstances as the session in 8. I expected feedback like "wrong, can't be true, can't hear it, sure new is better". Your claim that the difference would be small is definately not real life. Amonst mastering engineers (at least the ones i know) its is a known fact, that e.g. Logic has a terrible sound. A couple of years ago I have been doing comparisions of all major DAW (in the way you described, no plugs, faders at the exact same level etc) and there was a big difference. We examined Protools (HD and LE at the time), Logic, Cubase, Digital Performer etc, then did blind auditions of the files with many different people. So I am not doing this for the first time. I just upgraded to Cubase 8 and instantliy heard, that something has changed for the worse. Then i compared the files, sent them off to a mastering studio (to double check), all with the same result. It is a real life scenario. 100% the same session in 7 and 8. What makes the sound difference is to be analysed by the programmers. I need to mix here on a professional level and the decline in sound I experienced here is not an option. And if someone chan't here is on the files i posted: maybe get a better sound card?

one little remark: up to recently Steinberg advertised Cubase with the quality sound of its audio engine. now i can read nothing on this anymore. its just increased performance. maybe i can mell a rat: more plugs and instruments, less sound?

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

Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 12:38 pm
by sycophant
pwmspeed wrote: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

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
Great. I am a mixdown engineer, not a null-ing scientist. All which is evident is that a session in Cubase 7 sound better under 100% the same circumstances as the session in 8. I expected feedback like "wrong, can't be true, can't hear it, sure new is better". Your claim that the difference would be small is definately not real life. Amonst mastering engineers (at least the ones i know) its is a known fact, that e.g. Logic has a terrible sound. A couple of years ago I have been doing comparisions of all major DAW (in the way you described, no plugs, faders at the exact same level etc) and there was a big difference. We examined Protools (HD and LE at the time), Logic, Cubase, Digital Performer etc, then did blind auditions of the files with many different people. So I am not doing this for the first time. I just upgraded to Cubase 8 and instantliy heard, that something has changed for the worse. Then i compared the files, sent them off to a mastering studio (to double check), all with the same result. It is a real life scenario. 100% the same session in 7 and 8. What makes the sound difference is to be analysed by the programmers. I need to mix here on a professional level and the decline in sound I experienced here is not an option. And if someone chan't here is on the files i posted: maybe get a better sound card?

one little remark: up to recently Steinberg advertised Cubase with the quality sound of its audio engine. now i can read nothing on this anymore. its just increased performance. maybe i can mell a rat: more plugs and instruments, less sound?[/quote]

I don't doubt any of this, but the question is: is it system specific or the interaction between drivers and the ASIO subsystem, I'm inclined to think the latter.

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

Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 2:49 pm
by sonicstate
I have heard before of people hearing things that others are unable to hear. I'd say it is more a curse than a blessing. Most people are lucky to not be able to hear certain things.

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

Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 3:00 pm
by MrSoundman
sonicstate wrote:I have heard before of people hearing things that others are unable to hear
So have I, but usually it goes away after their medication has been adjusted.

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

Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 3:10 pm
by C.LYDE101
pwmspeed wrote:I have just loaded a Cubase 7 project straight into 8. I made quick 32 bit float bounces in 7 and 8. Sorry, but on first sight the new audio engine does not sound as good a the old one. Any other opinions?
Yeah.. Cubase VST32 sounded worse than SX, but then V2 sounded worse, thank goodness for V4 - but oh no 5 just didn't cut it.... and then along came 6 - the best sounding Cubase ever. V8 definitely needs work.., I think those 23.5Khz to 26.74Khz Blackmann calculations are messed up... :roll:

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

Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 4:15 pm
by Timo
Just a note: You all remember that the Channel EQ has changed completely with version 7? Means a mix from Cubase 6.5 or smaller will under NO circumstances null with a mix done with Cubase 7.0 or higher, as long as you use the Channel EQ. Up to now, I have NOT heard anything similar regarding the Channel EQ from v7.x to 8.0.

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

Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 11:27 pm
by BriHar
In a recent Musotalk vIdeo with Holger Steinbrink (whom many may know is one of the actual Beta testers and prime Cubase tutorial authors), at about 2 minutes in he dispells the idea that the audio engine has been totally revamped and describes that in fact the audio engine has simply been improved upon in regards to Asio guard in order to improve processor performance by the real-time monitoring and handling of time critical and nocritcal processing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdXU_oTvhBQ (unfortunately only in german).

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

Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2014 1:25 am
by Woodcrest Studio
MrSoundman wrote:
sonicstate wrote:I have heard before of people hearing things that others are unable to hear
So have I, but usually it goes away after their medication has been adjusted.
Or wears off! :lol:

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

Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2014 2:19 am
by curteye
MrSoundman wrote:So have I, but usually it goes away after their medication has been adjusted.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!
{'-'}

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

Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:00 am
by Jalcide
:lol: This thread ... Every year.

If DAWs are accurate enough for scientific signal analysis, and they are, they're accurate enough for our distortion pedals, noisy pickups and edm soundpacks. :lol:

Unless a project is nothing but rendered audio with pretty basic plugins, no two mixdowns will render precisely in the same version of Cubase.

Our modern, analog modeled plugins are rendering things like "loose resisters" these days (Softube reference).

All that said, I had an initial impression that Cubase 8 sounded better with my Cubase 7.5 project. This is of course not the case, but our minds fool us like this.

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

Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:51 pm
by Bantam
Will we see a panboy / fanboy standoff before the year's out?

Something might sound better or worse but Cubase cannot be blamed. I doubt more than a handful of any DAW users in the world could tell any difference at all and be sure it's not their own ears being fooled by their lovely new product or even their "wasted" money when the latest doesn't turn out to be that exciting after all.
Human nature.
If I close my eyes it sounds better without the sight. It looks the same to my ears. :mrgreen:

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

Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2014 11:35 pm
by lukasbrooklyn
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
( btw. just saw you worked on forss, that's one of my favourite artists! not released anything afterwards i'm guessing..?)

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

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 12:13 am
by peakae
BriHar wrote:In a recent Musotalk vIdeo with Holger Steinbrink (whom many may know is one of the actual Beta testers and prime Cubase tutorial authors)
He also makes lot of presets for VSTi, both Steinberg and Waldorf. The tutorials are really good if you understand German then that's where I would look first.
I haven't seen any official claim that the audio engine should be altered in any way other than you described (ASIO Guard 2).
I guess it's just some wishful thinking from some of the less informed users :-D

Re: Cubase 7 sounds better than 8 here

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 1:25 am
by ChrisDuncan
peakae wrote:Does it NULL ?
Well someone had to ask ;-)
Okay, there are so many snarky comments here I'm not sure if this is serious or not, but I've never been afraid to use the phrase "I don't know," so what the heck.

If this is an actual suggestion to the OP, could you explain what you mean?

Of course, if it's just another humorous reply, feel free to poke me with a stick for being so naïve. Actually, that might apply in either case. :)

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

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 1:45 am
by Bantam
pwmspeed wrote:Ok, feedback from one europes leading mastering studios chief mastering engineer. His quote: "The Cubase 8 mix lacks definition and body".
This a PM to you personally? Googling the quote just leads back here. One of Europe's finest MEs won't mind the advertising if he's named I'm sure.
The rest of Europe's mastering engineers don't seem to have noticed.
That's not to say most of them might have cloth ears. You could be right. I am hearing music that sounds really naff recently. Don't know what DAW but, to my ears, really bad mixes / production.

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

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:11 am
by peakae
ChrisDuncan wrote:
peakae wrote:Does it NULL ?
Well someone had to ask ;-)
Okay, there are so many snarky comments here I'm not sure if this is serious or not, but I've never been afraid to use the phrase "I don't know," so what the heck.
Cubase 7 does not sound better or worse than Cubase 8, they Sound the same. Why? Because they null.
But its a little more complicated than that. External hardware, faulty plugins, changes in the setup of the Cubase versions, like monitoring and and and. Doing a null test using plugins and/or external hardware can make it impossible to null even when rendered on the same version of Cubase.
I think it's a good idea to do a null test, just to make sure that every thing is as it should be. If not then it is time to eliminate the possible reasons.

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

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 4:45 pm
by ChrisDuncan
peakae wrote:I think it's a good idea to do a null test
That was actually my question. What do you mean by a null test?

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

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 5:06 pm
by peakae
Ahh, looked on YouTube and found this old video that explains it in a nice southern way :-)
http://youtu.be/lJUYhgYh_ks

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

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 8:21 pm
by ChrisDuncan
Oh, so you're talking about phase inverting and comparing. Gotcha.

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

Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 12:08 am
by sycophant
peakae wrote: I think it's a good idea to do a null test, just to make sure that every thing is as it should be. If not then it is time to eliminate the possible reasons.
I think you are right, but there can exist anomolies between the driver and software that alter the sound for better or worse and performing a null test in the DAW won't demonstrate the change that obviously so many people appear to be hearing.

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

Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 2:30 am
by Jarno
sycophant wrote:but there can exist anomolies between the driver and software that alter the sound for better or worse and performing a null test in the DAW won't demonstrate the change
What????

Interaction between software and driver is just a stream of bits. Driver should output exactly the same bits the software gave to it. If it doesn't, you should hear a lot of noise, crackle and pop. Not any mystical reduction of sound quality. Come on! This is not rocket science, just plain digital audio. If you don't understand basics of digital audio, please don't make any stupid statements.

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

Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 2:38 am
by sycophant
Jarno wrote:If you don't understand basics of digital audio, please don't make any stupid statements.
I don't need any forum users' validation on what I know to be true.

"Just a stream of bits" or "it's all 1's and 0's" is what the non-programming types say when pushed into a corner.

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

Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 6:01 am
by folkfreak
Nevertheless he is right.

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

Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 9:59 am
by HowlingUlf
is sycophant some kind of troll?

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

Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 11:05 am
by Jarno
sycophant wrote:non-programming types
OK. I have not done a lot of programming in last few years, but calling me a "non-programmer" is like calling someone making living from royalties of his old hits a "non-songwriter". :roll: