The Samplitude Sounds Great Thread

[jens]

Part 3 he gets it nulled.
https://youtu.be/lRvpIyXolhg

Of course. I explained to him how he messed up.

(in short: he used an algorithmic reverb (Pro-R) )

[WotEva]

Finally, we must keep in mind these tests are kept simple to avoid mistakes. Another example, Samp. channel eq's simply sound amazing (oversample+Lin. phase capable)...if included to similar test would further smoke other DAW's even more obvious.

The linear phase capability built into a channel level eq is certainly well rounded. But is the quality output of the eq really big enough to "smoke" the competition? Sound is going to be subjective, but Samplitude's eq certainly hasn't blown my hair back in comparison to Cakewalks pro-channel eq or Cubase's Frequecy. For a channel eq I would certainly say Samplitude wins on features, but I wouldn't necessarily raise any above the other in terms of sonic quality. And I would replace each and every one of them with a 3rd party eq when I need an eq that imparts a certain sonic character.

[WotEva]

Never underestimate the placebo effect. It is very real and it is very strong.. even when you know for a fact that it is present. There are tons of stupid things I do all the time that I _know_ make no difference yet I do them to please my ego and to ignore the placebo effect. While I'm doing these things, I am actually aware of the fact that there is no difference to the audio, yet I "hear" a difference which impacts my creativity/mood.. so I ignore it and go with what I feel sounds best.

Ignorance is a choise and I sometimes decide to be ignorant and let the creative juices flow. However I do never try to sell this "better sound" to anybody else. In fact I'm always very uppfront about it being placebo and just say it exactly as it is.. a quirk of mine.

I've noticed that I'm very sensitive to the user interface colours. For instance in Reaper I can "hear" a clear difference between two tracks if they are coloured a different way, yet contain the same audio. My brain _knows_ the audio is exactly the same, yet I sometimes have the need to ignore this fact and just carry on with my feeling of "better" just to keep the flow going.

I also absolutely love ABX tests. At one point I was almost obsessed with them. My findings are that if you get about 80% correct from a test sample of 50 tries you can be almost certain that you are actually hearing a difference. Any smaller percentage or smaller sample size you are most likely in the realm of the placebo effect.

My point is: The placebo effect is completely real and we are affected by it constantly, throughout our day. It can be very stressful if you constantly think about it and try to fight it. Thus you can and probably should knowingly simply embrace it and carry on, yet don't be ignorant of it being in play. Never ever try to deny it's existence and most importantly never ever try to convince others that what you "hear" is real. It isn't.

Cheers!
bM

Thanks for your input, I think you have perhaps nailed it. As I said in an earlier post, I don't believe that experienced recording artists and engineers are deliberately trying to deceive. They very obviously believe that they are hearing a certain something. I like how you explain that whilst you know there is no difference, you are still hearing one and so you go with the one that you like the best. That's probably the hidden mojo in a nutshell.

Our ears, or our brains ability to deceive us is quite incredible. I remember a track I worked on years back, where I had created a part with some descending strings which I liked at first, but after editing and mixing and hearing those strings 2000 times, I deleted them. When I hit play, the strings were still there. I thought the project must have been corrupted, or that the plugin had failed to delete properly. Wound up porting all the files into a brand new project and reloading all the plugs. Only to hit play and still hear those damned strings. I had to put that project on ice for about two months to not have my brain auto-play the deleted part.

[Cooker]

Finally, we must keep in mind these tests are kept simple to avoid mistakes. Another example, Samp. channel eq's simply sound amazing (oversample+Lin. phase capable)...if included to similar test would further smoke other DAW's even more obvious.

The linear phase capability built into a channel level eq is certainly well rounded. But is the quality output of the eq really big enough to "smoke" the competition? Sound is going to be subjective, but Samplitude's eq certainly hasn't blown my hair back in comparison to Cakewalks pro-channel eq or Cubase's Frequecy. For a channel eq I would certainly say Samplitude wins on features, but I wouldn't necessarily raise any above the other in terms of sonic quality. And I would replace each and every one of them with a 3rd party eq when I need an eq that imparts a certain sonic character.

If clarity then yeah oversampling (with lesser than 1ms latency, zero with standard) gives a better edge than replicating analog eq curves (with no saturation to back it up).

For quick low/high-cuts and low cpu solutions its perfect. If analog style eq would be required then sure 3rd party is better, better than any eq in any DAW.