Poll #1: SAW sound quality - am I crazy? (the horse refuses to die!)

[alchemist]

SawStudio sounds better to me than any other DAW out there.

But ... I am officially obsessed with the why.

You know, I can't sleep well thinking about this.

I am serious.

I know, I know, this is the 1,000,000th post about the engine's sound quality.

You might think this is futile. There seems no logical explanation to the percieved great sound quality of SAW. Nulling tests have been done. SAW nulls -inf when compared to other DAWs. But I swear I can hear the difference. Crystal-clear highs and lows. Sure. Call it off as "expectation bias". Whatever. SAW sounds (to me) like a console that is flat up to 200kHz.

I've done the tests. I mean, I believe in the scientific method. I expect to hear no differences. Today I matched a small mix that I did in SAWStudio with only fader moves in REAPER. I tried another one with VST plugins and fader movements (no internal effects). ABXed them with Foobar2000. No contest. I could pick up the SAW mix consistently. .. What the hell is going on?

I am going MAD.

SawStudio sounds like heaven.

But this makes me uneasy. Afraid. I mean ... what if something happens to Bob? (God forbid). How can the audio community continue without this software?

You see, I have become dependent on the program to create a mix that satisfies me. I can try mixing in another DAW, sure ... but the results are always lacking 'something'. That's probably why so many people obsess with plugins and summing boxes. There's 'something' missing.

See ... I really wanted to cry when I heard the mixes that Bud Johnson posted two days ago. They were mixed bone-dry. There were some overlapping frequencies. But it sounded so organic. When I heard the mixes I said "yup, this is the sound of SAW". Listen to SAW radio ... "it" is there in every mix.

But then again ... I could be NUTS. But then why can't I create mixes in other DAWs that that rival the ones I have done in SAW? What? are you going to attribute this to "workflow"? really?

Ok ... what about this theory:

What it phase cancelation tests do not tell all of the story?. Why are we using nulling tests when we can use bit-level comparisons?

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

Yep. I am nuts.

Shoot me.

What do you think about this? (go ahead, answer the poll).

[DominicPerry]

Without wanting to be rude, it's not a very objective list of answers. How about, "No, I prefer Samplitude but it falls over a lot so I use SAW". Or, "Pro Tools has better plugins and so my mixes sound better but I prefer to choose my own hardware". All of your answers are yes SAW sounds better (except the first) and not everyone will agree, that isn't why all of us are here.

Dominic

[DominicPerry]

My answer is "Yes it sounds better to me than Cubase, Audacity, ProTools LE and the same as Samplitude, but I have no idea why".

Dominic

[AudioAstronomer]

It's workflow and Available tools.

Every daw makes certain processes easier than others, and the user will usually lean towards those. Quickest availability of dsp processes as well will make a very large difference in the style, quality and sound of the mixes as well.

[Himhui]

Someone told me that the sound quality of SAWSTUDIO version 1.0 had already been that good.

[Microstudio]

I have recorded in many different DAW's and SAWStudio sounds the best.

My ears tell me and it was my ears that made me buy SAW.

[MikeDee]

SawStudio sounds better to me than any other DAW out there.

But ... I am officially obsessed with the why.

You know, I can't sleep well thinking about this.

I am serious.

I know, I know, this is the 1,000,000th post about the engine's sound quality.

You might think this is futile. ..........

And therein lies The Answer...as prophesied long ago, back in the SAWPro days, by MaXimum BoB, himself (remember the ads?).......

Resistance is Futile

Yep, Bob has us all under his spell...there are subliminal messages embedded in all o' his hand-coded assembly language routines. I keep studying the graphics during recording and playback, looking very closely for subtle (or not-so-subtle) images and icons to pop up here & there...like the subliminal Coke popups in the movie theaters.

Why, even Jeanne is in on it! It's all over the website...and on SAW Radio...even while it's down!!!

Is there no escape?!?! I-I can't................

Aahh...fugghedaboudit...I can't even type with a straight face...lmoao!!

Ahem...my two-part answer is:

1. I do hear a big difference between SAWStudio and AcidPro...and the first time I heard so, I was not expecting it and was, thus, blown away by the silkiness and fullness of SS...AcidPro sounds much thinner and harsher.

2. I do not hear a noticeable difference between SAWStudio and SoundForge. I might if I listen hard enough for differences, but that's when personal preferences and/or other subjective things might get in the way of pure objective listening. Besides, if I have to actually listen that hard for a difference...is it really worth doing so? At that point, I guess I'd better start A/B'ing sound cards, monitors, cables, the room......huh...music, what music? Oh, yea, I was mixing a tune about an hour or two ago...or was it last night......???

Meanwhile, the guy with the PortaStudio is busy putting out a record and getting signed.....ok, maybe I'm reaching...or am I? At this rate, he has a product to remix...and I have a clean and silky sound, which I've A/B'd to death...but no product.

Bottom line: I'm already satisfied with SAWStudio and the other tools I have. I'm gonna start A/B'ing my output, my products! I'll worry about which DAW is better once I've made enough ka¢hing to afford the time to do so...and even then, my answer will most likely remain the same.

Awright, I'm done...put a fork in me.

[Ian Alexander]

I have never compared the sound of SS to another DAW. I bought SSB because it offered some features I liked, but didn't have on SawPlus32. I bought SawPlus years ago because it would run on my Pentium 100 from Zeos. I already had WordPerfect and QuickBooks, so I wanted to stay on the PC side. [shrug]

I've stayed because the features work for me, it sounds fine to me, and the support is very good.

[CurtZHP]

Here's my limited experience. I recorded a song years ago on 1/2 analog. I later transfered the tracks to my PC using SAWPro. Years later, I remixed the song in Sony Vegas. I was never really satisfied with it, but I couldn't quite put my finger on why.

A year later, I got a Tascam DM-24 digital mixer. I tried remixing the song on the DM-24, using Vegas as nothing more than a playback deck. The result was much better.

Then I acquired SAWStudioLite. It was around this time that I started hearing a lot about the whole "Mixing In The Box" debate. I also joined this forum and heard about how SS was supposed to sound the best, especially when mixing ITB. (I had also heard the same thing on other forums.)

So, I took the same song and mixed it again in SAWStudioLite, basically copying as many parameters from the DM-24 mix as possible. (The EQ's are slightly different, and I had to use a different reverb.)

I A/B'ed the two mixes for weeks, often leaving several days between listens. I kept coming back to the SAW mix. For reasons I'm sure Bob could tell me, the high end was ever-so-slightly cleaner, the bass was tight, and the stereo imaging was the best I'd ever heard.

[Sam C]

yes, you are crazy.