Page 1 of 3

Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:13 pm
by esencia
Hi all,

I'm a long long time Logic user, and recently I decided to buy Cubase Pro 8.5...

Just to go to the point..

I've load same kontakt articulation in logic, and in Cubase. Same volume, pan and so...
When I play it in Cubase, the sound its clearly better.. More open, better lowend...
In logic is less open, and less warm..
When I start playing other instrument layers over it.. In cubase, everything fits better as it had more headroom...

Any other users could confirm this?
Thanks a lot..

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2016 4:01 pm
by raz cozyr
Cubase works internal with 32-Bit-Float bit-depth, which get the sound quality inside the programm at the best,what we actually got or can have. that´s the reason, why it sounds great and the headroom is nearly unlimited.(by the way, when you record your tracks also already in 32-Bit-Float, they will as a particular track not clipping over, but when you combine more or severeal tracks, which got a higher peak-volume, they all can clip over, when they get merged together in the output-bus, it`s possible that the output-channel will clip over).

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2016 7:11 pm
by esencia
raz cozyr wrote:Cubase works internal with 32-Bit-Float bit-depth, which get the sound quality inside the programm at the best,what we actually got or can have. that´s the reason, why it sounds great and the headroom is nearly unlimited.(by the way, when you record your tracks also already in 32-Bit-Float, they will as a particular track not clipping over, but when you combine more or severeal tracks, which got a higher peak-volume, they all can clip over, when they get merged together in the output-bus, it`s possible that the output-channel will clip over).
Interesting..and Cubase always is working at 32bit-float or you need to set it?
Logic is not working at the same depth of calculations?

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 8:03 am
by raz cozyr
yes, ever internal, you don´t need and you don´t be able to set this. it´s all in the manual, maybe i can find the related section/area for you to see.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 8:07 am
by esencia
Thanks! In the manual I read that you can select the level of depth for audio tracks.. But I didn´t know that it´s allways working at 32-bit-float internally. If that´s true , it makes sense why I feel better sound and more headroom..

Strange to think why logic is not working in 32bit float yet...

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:04 am
by raz cozyr
i could not find it the operation manual of the actual version, in this less time. but here it is in the Cubase 5 manual: Page 118,right above in the side. i`ll try to get a pic.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 10:09 am
by Grim
Logic also works 32 bit internal.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:20 am
by AP
Cubase has a superior 32 bit audio engine. And this post confirms it. I noticed the lower sound quality of garage band. But I thought it wasn't a fair comparison.

Thanks for posting and confirming this.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:31 am
by raz cozyr
AP wrote:Cubase has a superior 32 bit audio engine. And this post confirms it. I noticed the lower sound quality of garage band. But I thought it wasn't a fair comparison.

Thanks for posting and confirming this.
ya, but only internal, to get no clipping on recordings you make, you must set the value in the project-settings-window (shift+S), also to 32-Bit-float, to get this quality on your records.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 2:35 pm
by Grim
Avoiding clipping is something you should aim to do with sensible gain staging. 24 bit already has masses of headroom anyhow.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 6:41 pm
by M1000
I've load same kontakt articulation in logic, and in Cubase. Same volume, pan and so...
Is it the same pan law too?

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:10 pm
by J-S-Q
Why not post some audio files showing the difference? I'm sure it would be of interest to many people, myself included. I have to say though, usually these kinds threads end up with the conclusion that the OP made some kind of setup error.

Please post the files.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:13 pm
by AP
If you play the alchemy synth in Garage Band at 24 bit / 48 kHz / built audio. After that open Cubase with the same settings. Play any VSTi you'll notice the difference instantly. Even when I import audio loops created in GB, anyone can tell.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:47 am
by raz cozyr
AP wrote:If you play the alchemy synth in Garage Band at 24 bit / 48 kHz / built audio. After that open Cubase with the same settings. Play any VSTi you'll notice the difference instantly. Even when I import audio loops created in GB, anyone can tell.
Can you describe it more exactly?

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:50 am
by raz cozyr
here it is in the actual manual Cubase Pro 8.5, for one time: P.S. Sorry, in the moment i´m unable to get a pic or link in, but here: Cubase Pro 8.5-Operation Manual-Page 971- under "Bit-depth"


Bit Depth (uncompressed file formats only)
Allows you to select 8, 16, 24 bit or 32 bit (float) files. If the file is an
“intermediate mixdown” that you plan to re-import and continue working on in
Cubase, we recommend that you select the 32 bit (float) option.
32 bit (float) is a very high resolution (the same resolution as used internally
for audio processing in Cubase
), and the audio files will be twice the size of
16 bit files.
If you are making a mixdown for CD burning, use the 16 bit option, as CD
audio is always 16 bit.
In this case, we recommend dithering.
Activate the UV-22HR dithering plug-in (see the separate PDF document
Plug-in Reference for details). This reduces the effects of quantization noise
and artifacts from being introduced when converting the audio down to 16 bit.
8 bit resolution should only be used if required, since it results in limited audio
quality. 8 bit audio may be suitable in some multimedia applications, etc.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 1:08 pm
by MattiasNYC
raz cozyr wrote:to get no clipping on recordings you make, you must set the value in the project-settings-window (shift+S), also to 32-Bit-float, to get this quality on your records.
If you mean "when recording" then it's not really true. The clipping happens at the conversion stage, and that stage isn't floating point processing but fixed point. With recording set to 24-bits you have plenty of headroom. 32-bit float isn't really needed for recording.

If you're talking about the final mix file then there's definitely a possibility of clipping, but it can be solved by adjusting gain during the mix process as well as lowering the final output level on the master fader.

In addition, not all types of software accepts 32-bit float files, so there's also the issues of compatibility.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:05 pm
by AP
raz cozyr wrote:
AP wrote:If you play the alchemy synth in Garage Band at 24 bit / 48 kHz / built audio. After that open Cubase with the same settings. Play any VSTi you'll notice the difference instantly. Even when I import audio loops created in GB, anyone can tell.
Can you describe it more exactly?
The OP described it best:

"Cubase, the sound its clearly better.. More open, better lowend...
In logic is less open, and less warm.. In cubase, everything fits better as it had more headroom..."

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 9:50 pm
by Cube100
I'd just like to second the notion that Cubase does have a clearer sound than Logic.

I did an A/B between the two with the exact same MIDI and VSTs. I did one raw export, and one export with a multi band compressor and limiter on the output, each with identical settings. I can't seem to find a way to upload the audio files, but there's a noticeable difference.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:54 am
by MattiasNYC
Same multi band compressor and limiter in both DAWs?

Just post screen caps to start with.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 2:20 am
by Cube100
MattiasNYC wrote:Same multi band compressor and limiter in both DAWs?
Each DAW's default plugin. Same settings.

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 2:50 am
by MattiasNYC
I'm not sure you can assume that the processors actually work the exact same way. The "audio engine" is not the same thing as plugin algorithms.

Either you set your test up to test summing and what not, and that means not using any processing, or you test processing itself. But that's an essentially pointless and irrelevant test for the most part since people use third-party plugins all the time.

So, I think your test is pretty meaningless unless you know for a fact exactly how those processors work so that the comparison makes sense.

People have done this stuff like a million times already....

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 3:02 am
by TEEF
MattiasNYC wrote: People have done this stuff like a million times already....

Yes. However I still continue to contribute! Everything sounds better than everything!

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 4:20 am
by Cube100
MattiasNYC wrote:So, I think your test is pretty meaningless unless you know for a fact exactly how those processors work so that the comparison makes sense.
But my primary test was a raw export without any plugins, remember? Did I not do what you're describing?

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 3:52 pm
by Stephen57
Mattias's post poses good questions. Did we look at a summing tests or other tests? Something like this.

1. Import identical files into each DAW.
2. No plug-ins, systems lined up to the identical reference levels (as reported by each DAW's metering, and, if possible, some high-end external reference metering, "god meter.")
3. Create New Output files with each DAW -- DAW-L.wav, DAW-C.wav
4. Cross import each file into the DAWs, observe any differences, perform null tests, etc.
5. Import files into 3rd "reference" system -- high-end audio editor of choice. Further tests.

Did it really "sound better," or did I just turn up the volume? ( :twisted: runs...)

Re: Cubase Audio Engine vs Logic. Cubase wins!

Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 4:27 pm
by MattiasNYC
Cube100 wrote:
MattiasNYC wrote:So, I think your test is pretty meaningless unless you know for a fact exactly how those processors work so that the comparison makes sense.
But my primary test was a raw export without any plugins, remember? Did I not do what you're describing?
Sorry, I actually missed that.

I'll just have to say then that if you're truly measuring the "audio engine" then I just don't believe you. Two DAWs just exporting the same file with zero processing should sound exactly the same unless something is wrong. The only technical difference would possibly be dithering, and even if that is a difference it'll be inaudible because it'll exist below the noise floor of whatever room you're listening in.

This has been done a million times. You're either doing something wrong, or there's something wrong with your setup, or you're imagining things.

But you really have to eliminate things that aren't part of the audio engine. You wrote: "the exact same MIDI and VSTs". So, you didn't use anything on the master, but you used midi connected to VSTi? How do you know that what you're hearing is the difference of the "audio engine" and not the "midi engine" or the VSTi themselves?