Audio quality comparison between 32bit and 64bit host

Cubase
21

I think you mean double-precision floating-point was optional for internal processing in the case of VST, still nothing to do with the OP’s question and terribly OT.

Let’s approach it from a different angle: if I use native OS drivers (non-ASIO) and don’t load any VST effects or instruments, will I hear a difference between the same project rendered on the 32-bit version of Cubase, and rendered on the 64-bit version?

No, because the versions differ only in terms of the OS/CPU architecture they were compiled for, and the internal processing is the same.

Now we just need someone to come along and claim that the Mac version of Cubase sounds better than the Windows version… :wink:

22

Windows 98 used a system called VXD, whereas with XP/2000 you had WDM, although ASIO worked with both the latter was more efficient.

With Vista/W7 you now have WASAPI, which Steinberg applications fully support.

On the mac side it is built into the core of the operating system hence the term “Core Audio” however the same is also true on the windows side.

Basically, any drivers which are only ASIO 2.0 compliant do not allow double width integers to be used and thus will only allow the fixed set of calculations to be performed as defined by the instruction set of the CPU.

23

:open_mouth: Are you trolling, or just determined to have the last word?

24

The OP wants to know if there is any difference between using a 64 bit and a 32 bit system.

Since no parameters were defined I am trying to outline all the various issues in relation to working with audio on a computer.

Fortunately Steinberg have covered all bases very well, hence nearly all widely used DAW programs using their underlying standards.

Regarding the specifications VST 2.4 allows double precision math to be employed, whereas ASIO 2.2 allows double width integers to be utilized.

Hope that helps

25



But what about the audio quality of the final product, is there any difference in terms of dynamics, wideness and loudness?

Are not these the defined parameters?

26

Subjectively yes but technically no.

The problem with this type of discussion is that it tends to invoke emotional debate rather than technical discourse.

That being said however depending on program material, the methods used in the SDK’s can influence the sound, just as using higher sample/bit rates.

Cheers

27

McDonald’s allow double quarter-pounders to be eaten (an equally irrelevant assertation).

28

:laughing: Keep it up! Loving it! (need more popcorn … can you hold off on your next contribution for 5 min. pls?)

29

What hardware are you using MrSoundMan can I ask?

30



… :cry: too upset to get into that right now!

31

Ok so why make inferences around trolling if you can’t answer questions put to you while trying to discredit others?

32

:smiley: nada, gotta try harder … :cry: even more upset now … please stop!

33

Added to foe list.

34

The quick answer to this

is there any difference in terms of dynamics, wideness and loudness

Is NO!

and I would want direct evidence to prove otherwise.

35

It’s called Golden Ears, maybe curteye has them

36

Sorry cramar, ears are just not up to the job (thats means everybody’s ears) now show me a proper null test and I’ll start to believe.

37

Thank you everyone for the info. i really appreciate it.

38

Yes, we have done a comparison between Cubase 6 32 bit and 64 bit in the same hardware system, same operating system (Win 7 64 bit) and with the same songs. Everything was identical except for running Cubase 6 in 32 bit and 64 bit. All of the post expounding on the technical aspects of computers, audio and the “theory” about why it should be the same are to put it as gently as possible…wrong.

Here are the facts based on a music artist/sound engineer and myself both listening to identical songs created in Cubase and played in both versions. The 64 bit version produces sound that is dramatically better than 32 bit. The sound is deeper, richer, fuller in every aspect. The music artist / sound engineer complained about having to go back to Cubase 32 bit because she said the music sounded flat after hearing it in 64 bit. We tested both songs that were created in 32 bit and a new song that is being created in 64 bit. While all songs sounded better in the 64 bit version, the one actually created in 64 bit was amazing…a huge leap in sound quality and dynamics. Once you create a song in a true 64 bit environment, you’ll never want to go back.

So, you can throw all those theories and discussions about bit rates, audio, files, and other technical discussions out the window. The facts prove without question that there is a huge difference in how the music sounds in 64 bit when everything is 64 bit (DAW, ASIO, system, operating, etc.). When facts and theory are different, it is the theory that needs to be rethought to conform to the facts.

32 bit is dead. Long live 64 bit. (now, if only all the effects producers would update their stuff to true 64 bit!!!)

Cubase 6 6.03, Win Pro 7 64 bit (system developer version), MOTU Traveler with a 64 bit ASIO driver (recently released), ADK quad core computer designed for music, 8 gigs RAM, ADAM speakers, Mogami cables. Music created with a Korg M3, Korg Radias R, Korg Triton, Native Instruments and Waves.

Music artist / sound engineer / mixer / producer: Lia Shapiro of Alien Tribe http://www.alientribe.com (you can see a picture of her music studio on the website)

39

This is all meaningless without a null test. People’s hearing, no matter how golden they may be, are not accurate enough to prove one way or the other. It has been shown countless of times during blind ABX testings. I can’t even begin to tell you how many times this subject has been discussed over at the Cakewalk forums, and I am still waiting for someone to prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that 64 bit float sounds better than 32 bit float. It’s the same marketing BS as those who advocate 192KHz.

40

What are these “facts” you are talking about?