Do You Recognise The Sound Of The DAW?

[Jac459]

That's a skill issue.

Or money issue

No, it's an issue of age and disableton

Your personal experience is invaluable. Thanks for sharing!

Keep your software updated!!!

I switched to Reaper
It updates every 47 minutes
MuLab App works amazingly well in it.
Best of both worlds.

Maybe I'll be selling Ableton and Bitwig. It took me a long time (Reaper v3.0) but, somehow this time, it clicked with me, and I can still use the Amazing Mulab Matrix in Reaper.
Just a fantastic combination.

I need to update my signature.

Can't guess if you are being sarcastic.

[liquidsound]

I can still use the Amazing Mulab Matrix in Reaper.
Just a fantastic combination.

I am also a big fan of the "MuLab Sound"

What does Reaper add?
Did you make a custom portable install or use it stock?

It adds custom workflow and Themes (I'm using one called Peace, nice and clean) and it's capable of running with really minimal CPU resources.
I don't know how but it does, and it's extremely stable.

I have a portable setup as well.
MuLab is always used by itself or as a Plugin.
I never adventured in MuLab's deep modular universe beside basic stuff, but I'm warming up to the idea of digging way past my regular usage.

MuLab has been consistently with me since v2.x... and Jo is an "outstanding" developer.

[liquidsound]

Or money issue

No, it's an issue of age and disableton

Your personal experience is invaluable. Thanks for sharing!

Keep your software updated!!!

I switched to Reaper
It updates every 47 minutes
MuLab App works amazingly well in it.
Best of both worlds.

Maybe I'll be selling Ableton and Bitwig. It took me a long time (Reaper v3.0) but, somehow this time, it clicked with me, and I can still use the Amazing Mulab Matrix in Reaper.
Just a fantastic combination.

I need to update my signature.

Can't guess if you are being sarcastic.

No. I think Reaper is my MBA in endurance

[Jac459]

No, it's an issue of age and disableton

Your personal experience is invaluable. Thanks for sharing!

Keep your software updated!!!

I switched to Reaper
It updates every 47 minutes
MuLab App works amazingly well in it.
Best of both worlds.

Maybe I'll be selling Ableton and Bitwig. It took me a long time (Reaper v3.0) but, somehow this time, it clicked with me, and I can still use the Amazing Mulab Matrix in Reaper.
Just a fantastic combination.

I need to update my signature.

Can't guess if you are being sarcastic.

No. I think Reaper is my MBA in endurance

Endurance and resilience he he.

[jonljacobi]

In answer to the topic--no.

[HAL76]

I can´t hear Ableton anymore.

That's a skill issue.

That is a german expression. In english you´d say "I can´t stand the sound of Ableton anymore"

[jens]

Genau

(But then again, why would you expect some German dude who posts dumb nonsense like that to be capable of expressing himself in English acceptably?)

[syntonica]

I can´t hear Ableton anymore.

That's a skill issue.

That is a german expression. In english you´d say "I can´t stand the sound of Ableton anymore"

I'm American and I thought and wrote that in American.

[HAL76]

I can´t hear Ableton anymore.

That's a skill issue.

That is a german expression. In english you´d say "I can´t stand the sound of Ableton anymore"

I'm American and I thought and wrote that in American.

no no. We always ´say "I can´t hear that anymore" when "something goes us on the nerv" (gets on our nerves).

Or we just say "Ableton goes me full on the sack" *ROFL*

[mixtur.se]

what people are trying to say here, is that "the DAW sound" is complete bullshit. this has been discussed to death both here and in other places, but for the benefit of those who have not yet read any of these discussions, here's the gist of it.

audio is not magic. an audio track is a stream of numbers. if you mix two signals together, you're just adding two numbers together, and are getting a new stream of numbers. your DAW is a big calculator, and as a software developer I can tell you that it's very difficult to write a calculator in a way that wouldn't be reproducible by any other calculator. the definitive way to prove whether two tracks "sound the same" is to reverse the phase on one of them - if you get silence in return, two tracks are perfectly identical. so, when you recreate the same project in different DAWs, they will cancel each other out, because, like I said, it's just a calculator, so they produce identical results when doing identical things.

the reason why these myths persist is two-fold. for one, most people don't realize how complex a DAW project actually is, and how much minute changes (such as different approaches to rounding, different pan laws, different approaches to visualizing gain etc.) can actually affect the end result and make it so that things don't null in the end. so, they will claim that "of course DAWs null on simple projects with no plugins and no gain adjustment, but they won't null when you start playing with faders, automation etc.", and they think that this somehow proves DAWs have different "sound" to them, even though it doesn't - all it proves is that DAWs can make more complex decisions (such as pan law, gain, or UI interaction) slightly differently from each other, which results in tiny differences that are imperceptible to human ear, but can be detected in a null test. (try bouncing with all of those changes made to take them out of the equation, and you're back to things nulling)

more importantly, people will compare apples to oranges, and claim that because apples are not oranges, therefore one of the DAWs are "better sounding" than the other. I'm talking about using automation (obviously, every DAW will implement automation slightly differently), different timestretching/resampling/dithering algorithms (obviously, those will be different between DAWs), or even using built-in FX (obviously, those will be different between DAWs). while one might indeed like DAW A's resampling algorithm better than DAW B's, it is not because DAW A "sounds better" than DAW B in a way that most people would understand this term. it would be more akin to liking built-in FX of DAW A better than DAW B - which, I mean, OK, but that's an entirely different kettle of apples, because you're not comparing DAWs at that point.

bottom line, DAWs do not sound differently, and they do not have "a sound". however, some components in a DAW can be a source of subtle (or not, if we're talking built-in FX) differences that the user might feel they prefer.

There was an article in sound on sound where they tested just this, and the conclusion was that there are differences whenever a file is processed, ex fade outs and panning. These are small differences obviously but it makes sense that developers might implement dsp slightly differently (pan law, fade in/out curves etc).

Summing is pure math.

[Tj Shredder]

Technically there is no difference, or beyond perception.
But do not underestimate differences in workflow, that results in differences of production techniques. And most important is, how inspiring the workflow is, that results in differences of composition and freshness of the end result.
Also different mindsets choose different tools. The precise sound engineer prefers a clear and limited but no hassle tool like ProTools, the inspiration has to come from the musicians. For a sound designers mindset Bitwig, Live or Mulab are perfect playgrounds. Nerds create their DAW within Max or Pure Data…
Often a limitation in features is a god send as its easier to focus on important basics…
Yes, obviously its possible to hear the difference, or we would have a single DAW that rules the world…

[zion rebels]

No, but i noticed each era i was in a different daw i would get "different style" on the mix. im not sure if is because of audio stuff or other psychological facts lol.

[Teddy66]

Oh here we go again. Came here looking for a comparison on DAWs for live work, yes, Ableton Live is an obvious one, but I cannot believe the amount of discussions on the net from people claiming that a DAW has a distinctive sound, or that they can recognise the tonal quality of a DAW.

If anything, just thinking aloud here, I think that the claim of a DAW having a particular sound probably comes down to two things, one, whoever produced the track in said DAW overused some samples, presets or whatever, and two, those that claim to recognise the sound of a DAW are very proficient with several DAWs, and from years of experience, can recognise certain overused stock samples, presets, fx or whatever that haven't been changed from their 'factory' settings. Like I said, just thinking out aloud, happy to be told I'm way off the mark.

But as for a DAW having its own sound, yeah, that's called confirmation bias.

[stamp]

My daw sounds than yours...