Any science to explain the “weight” or “3D depth” of hardware audio vs software that some people claim?

[vurt]

weight is a measurement of mass. does sound have mass? does software have mass?

aparently the Internet weighs 25g

20g of cat pics and 4g porn 1g everything else?

[spunkmuffin]

weight is a measurement of mass.

False.
Mass versus weight

does sound have mass? does software have mass?

If there is no mass then there is no sound.
Sound can only travel through mass.
If there is no hardware then there is no software.
If there is no mass then there is no software.

[earlevel]

The bottom line is that such claims are meaningless, scientifically, without back by ABX (double-blind testing, as Tj pointed out).

First, there are vague descriptions of benefits, (weight, "improved soundstage"), but even when the benefits can be described precisely ("10% reduction in harmonic distortion", "noise floor extended to -144 dB"), it doesn't mean they can be perceived.

You can't rely on statements from even the most experienced audio professionals, you need ABX. An extremely well-known mastering engineer that I respect greatly told me he can hear the 24th bit of digital audio, and even described the test setup he used to prove it to himself. If you don't know why this is impossible in analog gear, it deserves another thread, but the short story is a fraction of a µV against unavoidable thermal noise in electronics operating above absolute zero. But I just found a nice scientific quote from the Mojo Audio (maker of a $7555.55 DAC) site that sums it up:

"Any company that claims greater than 20-bit resolution from their DAC is simply full of shit."

And that's before the shortcomings of the human ear and masking inherent with a real audio signal.

[imrae]

"Soundstage" is a word often associated with expensive headphones. I have no idea what it means.

[zerocrossing]

No science, at least not by me, but I do have a theory. I noticed that I kind of agreed with people when they said that x synth had “weight” in the tone, but when hooked up to a spectrum analyzer, the only actual differences I could sometimes see was the hardware synth had a noticeably louder noise floor, even if that noise was buried in a mix. I started thinking about noise and how environments all have noise signatures, unless you’re in an anechoic chamber. My theory is that when your noise floor is sufficiently low, you get a psychological separation from the sounds “environment.” Acoustic instruments are less prone to this because you need to mic them to record them, but I remember going into a studio where we had a ton of isolation on each instrument and I remember thinking my acoustic guitar seemed to loose it’s “weight” no matter how we EQed it.

Anyway, that’s all based on anecdotal evidence and speculation, but there’s a lot about it that rings true to me. I do notice that when a track seems to lack “weight” and “warmth,” that a bit of tape emulation with some tape noise does help.

[Meffy]

"Soundstage" is a word often associated with expensive headphones. I have no idea what it means.

Audiophiles and, I suppose, other gearheads use "soundstage" to mean the imagined/perceived positions of the individual parts of a mix within the 2-D space around the listener. (With speakers above and below this can be extended into 3-D.)

If I understand right, the claim is that pricey headphones or monitoring setups of whatever kind provide a listener more cleanly defined position for each sound, while cheaper gear is defective in this regard.

As with so much audiophile "common sense" I suspect that this reasoning might have a kernel of truth buried in it — that really cheap headphones are likely to produce a less crystal-clear stereo image than ones meant for serious studio use — but that it was devised mostly to sell high-priced equipment, or to help buyers justify having spent so much on it. Whatever truth there might be tends to get buried in mumbo-jumbo and vague adjectives that don't mean the same thing to any two people.

[earlevel]

My theory is that when your noise floor is sufficiently low, you get a psychological separation from the sounds “environment.”

I was at a Brian Eno speaking event years ago, where he told the story of setting up some background music for an event, in the new days of CD. It didn't sound right to him. He set up a cassette deck with a blank tape and mixed in the hiss to improve it.

[Meffy]

An extremely well-known mastering engineer that I respect greatly told me he can hear the 24th bit of digital audio

He spoke truth.

Of course, he was counting from the LSB upward.

[MadBrain]

3D depth usually is something like "the audio going to the right ear is not the same as the audio going to the left ear". This is why guitars are often recorded with 2 separate takes (one panned left, one panned right) - you get a lot more stereo image than if you did something simpler like recording one take and then adding some depth with effects.

[Fender19]

Is there any science to explain the "weight" or "3D depth" of hardware audio vs software that some people claim?

Any chance you are referring to this thread over on Gearslutz? https://www.gearslutz.com/board/masteri ... parts.html

Keep in mind that some of these guys can hear a difference in wire gauge: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/masteri ... ables.html

IDK how much of this I believe or is based on something tangible. IMO, if you can hear it you should be able to measure it. Many audio processors can do something “Magical” but it is not caused by “magic” - it can all be defined and explained at some level. Possible explanations include phase shifts that nearly all electronic fx produce along with noise, non-linearities, crosstalk, etc.

[toine6]

No science, at least not by me, but I do have a theory. I noticed that I kind of agreed with people when they said that x synth had “weight” in the tone, but when hooked up to a spectrum analyzer, the only actual differences I could sometimes see was the hardware synth had a noticeably louder noise floor, even if that noise was buried in a mix. I started thinking about noise and how environments all have noise signatures, unless you’re in an anechoic chamber. My theory is that when your noise floor is sufficiently low, you get a psychological separation from the sounds “environment.” Acoustic instruments are less prone to this because you need to mic them to record them, but I remember going into a studio where we had a ton of isolation on each instrument and I remember thinking my acoustic guitar seemed to loose it’s “weight” no matter how we EQed it.

Anyway, that’s all based on anecdotal evidence and speculation, but there’s a lot about it that rings true to me. I do notice that when a track seems to lack “weight” and “warmth,” that a bit of tape emulation with some tape noise does help.

I don't hear or care about analog sound being 3D or having weight, but I like your explanation.

The quiet background noise would make things possibly seem more alive and organic, while also adding a contrast to a sound that might otherwise be too pristine and lifeless.

But running a digital synth through analog devices would add some background noise and kind of negate that, or at least replicate it to some degree. As you say, a tape emulation with some noise does help, in that sense.

And not to mention it ad nauseam, but all these golden ear debates are like arguing with someone who has severe OCD. If the rug is not squared up enough for anyone to notice except the person measuring it's angles with a protractor, it doesn't matter. People should trust their gut a little more. You don't need $5,000 in tools in order to level that little bump in your lawn, just eyeball it, level it out freehand, and go for it. It'll be alright.

[BONES]

Some hardware tape machines do indeed give a low end bump (as I'm sure you know), and other hardware items might affect the sound when it passes through them.

But you'd only know that if you had the original signal to compare it to. And that becomes about the medium, not the source material.

But software processes such as Nebula (Acusticaudio) can pretty well replicate 'depth' of hardware consoles etc (for example AlexB consoles).

You're not going to sit there and tell me you can hear what console was used to record/mix a particular piece of music, are you? If you try I will just laugh in your face.

[BONES]

There's, I think, strong subjective evidence to suggest that the phenomenon is true.

If it's subjective, it's not evidence, it's hokum.
Many years ago I put up an audio file with presets from the hardware K-Station and virtual V-Station. Around half the people who dared to guess were wrong, which is what you'd expect given a 50:50 choice and no actual difference. It showed me quite conclusively that there is no difference, no special sauce that makes one better than the other. That if you don't know which is which, you can't tell one from the other.

The only way to prove it one way or the other is with blind testing. If people can pick the hardware from the software reliably in such tests, then there will be something to it. If they can't, then the myth is totally busted. Such a test should be easy enough to set up. If you own a hardware synth or two, it shouldn't be a problem. One thing to remember, though - someone picked the hardware in my test because of the extra noise from the signal path so if you keep your hardware plugged in and record the noise along with the VSTi sound, you'll eliminate one source of contamination (or balance it out, anyway).

[AnX]

"Soundstage" is a word often associated with....

movies

[dark water]

Some hardware tape machines do indeed give a low end bump (as I'm sure you know), and other hardware items might affect the sound when it passes through them.

But you'd only know that if you had the original signal to compare it to. And that becomes about the medium, not the source material.

No shit, sherlock.

But software processes such as Nebula (Acusticaudio) can pretty well replicate 'depth' of hardware consoles etc (for example AlexB consoles).

You're not going to sit there and tell me you can hear what console was used to record/mix a particular piece of music, are you? If you try I will just laugh in your face.

Are you trolling or just stupid?

Try actually READING and UNDERSTANDING what somebody else wrote at KVR for once in your well-known argumentative existence here Bones instead of just inventing pathetic strawman arguments for the sake of fighting people for no good reason.