Ian remembers that the aliasing sounded worse on 1.32 but he wasn't certain. I loaded both versions of the OS, 1.32 and 1.40 and played the same patch (taken from the first link) with exactly the same volume settings and no other parameter changes. I recorded what I played in a MIDI file and played both OS versions from that MIDI file, so this is a pretty good A/B comparison. I kept things short to save bandwidth. As it is, these are over 7 MB each. I played mostly high notes because that's where the aliasing is most noticable.
Here are two wave files. I won't identify which file is associated from which release for obvious reasons. I'm posting a poll just to see what people think. After a while, I'll identify which version was which. I will say that this isn't a trick - I wouldn't play games posting the same version or something like that.
Of course, this is only one example. If someoine has a different patch that the feel better demonstrates a change in sound character or quality, please let us know.
phase-shifter-take2.wav
Description:
Phase shifter test - take 2
Filesize:
7.21 MB
Duration:
0:43
Viewed:
3957 Time(s)
phase-shifter-take1.wav
Description:
Phase shifter test - take 1
Filesize:
7.2 MB
Duration:
0:43
Viewed:
3797 Time(s)
Last edited by mosc on Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:18 am; edited 1 time in total
Did you try to study waveforms, noise and/or whatever? I would like to see hard data on this. _________________ A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"
The files are the data. People can study them as they wish and report their findings here. I prefer to trust my ears, but I'm open to any other methods. _________________ --Howard
my music and other stuff
Joined: Jun 04, 2004 Posts: 875 Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:12 am Post subject:
Interesting test. Looking at the graphic image of the waveforms, I'd say there are diffenences. At the start of the signals, one waveform (blown up totally) shows more evenly distributed amplitude steps than the other. But in sound.... it's rather hard. I say take 1 is 1.40, as it seems to have more bass... well....that's my guess.
I don't hear a significant difference between the two files. What I recall was a pronounced 'grit' which is not present in these samples. Can't dispute the facts however. Apologies to all for the misinformation.
haven't done the test yet but just curious...if there is some enhancemend with 1.4 is it possible to do a "rollback" to 1.32?
if a machine is uptaded there might be some things not reversable?!?
anyway.doin' the test now...
ok i made my vote.to keep it blind i stay silent and wait for results.
oh and btw, it was not easy to decide if ver. 1 or 2 sounds better because it is also a matter of taste.
haven't done the test yet but just curious...if there is some enhancemend with 1.4 is it possible to do a "rollback" to 1.32?
if a machine is uptaded there might be some things not reversable?!?
this is a possibility raised in another thread. i guess the only way we'll know is if someone who hasn't updated to 1.32 could participate in the discussion.
Anyone can run the synth updated program from any previous version and it will install the older version for you. If this is incorrect, then I'll remove this test because that's what I did. _________________ --Howard
my music and other stuff
Joined: Jun 04, 2004 Posts: 875 Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:48 pm Post subject:
This is a difference in waveform I'd say (from the first few notes; I selected a part where the pitch changes to check correct alignment)
[edit] added more pics. All zoom levels are equal, even though the scales don't seem identical (caused by scrolling the tracks into the right part of the screen).
LeftChannelsWaveForms.JPG
Description:
waveform of the left channels from the blind test v1.4 vs v1.32
Filesize:
22.18 KB
Viewed:
32730 Time(s)
This image has been reduced to fit the page. Click on it to enlarge.
LeftChannelsWaveForms2.JPG
Description:
And a little further down the line
Filesize:
27.71 KB
Viewed:
32733 Time(s)
This image has been reduced to fit the page. Click on it to enlarge.
LeftChannelsWaveForms3.JPG
Description:
I guess I made my point by now ;)
Filesize:
165.68 KB
Viewed:
32725 Time(s)
This image has been reduced to fit the page. Click on it to enlarge.
In this particular patch, the LFOs and the oscillators aren't synced to the note onsets, so it's probably normal to expect the waveforms to look different even. Sometimes, looking at waveforms doesn't help all that much. _________________ --Howard
my music and other stuff
Joined: Jun 04, 2004 Posts: 875 Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:29 pm Post subject:
The fact that lfo's and osc's aren't synced do make the comparison semi-objective, however. I have focussed my listening on some specific parts of the demo, where I could hear clear differences. These could also have been caused by the free running oscillators
For the 2nd part of the test the two files should be swapped, the topmost is listened to considerably more than the bottom most. The topmost gets more votes for "better sounding" as well. The test is obviously biased now :-)
Well.. sometimes... but is this a contest? Which is the better sounding? that doesn´t make any sense. What we would want to know is: Is there an audible difference between these OS versions? If so, what did they do and how and "why". Then we would want to do tests in order to figure how this difference really sounds like.
Dunno.. perhaps I am anal about these matters. _________________ A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"
Joined: Jan 25, 2006 Posts: 1 Location: The Netherlands
Audio files: 1
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:42 pm Post subject:
Hi there,
I was actually A/B ing the audio files mosc posted and found some differences. I've attached an audio example below.
What you hear is a small audio section, first 4x from the 954 file and then 4x from the 596 file etc.. The 954 section sounds chorused with smeared attacks in comparison.
This could very well be caused by not having synced oscillators so I think it's very difficult to judge any differences from these files.
Joined: Jun 20, 2004 Posts: 701 Location: Brisbane, Australia
Audio files: 12
G2 patch files: 79
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:40 pm Post subject:
I think they both sound fine, and I don't think there's any way I can tell the difference between the two. The aliasing is minimal (because of the filtering) in both until you hit that top note... And I'm one of the "believers" in the 1.40 sounding better myth!
A much better test in my opinion would be Tim turning the filter off and playing some long notes on each G2x, then piecing together the wav file the way gee has - 2 sustained notes, one for each OS, then octave up and repeat, keeping the order the same each time.
perhaps some of us should form a cult based on the notion that we like the 1.32 sound quality significantly better, and are willing to give up patch mutation/adjusting in order to be able to use the 1.32 os.
from time to time, we can gripe about that clavia won't listen to our requests to maintain 2 paralell operating systems...one with the "new, better sound" and one without, so that we can all benefit from the new software, and not feel left unsupported and betrayed (we did buy the machine for the "old sound", after all).
Joined: Dec 29, 2004 Posts: 961 Location: Northeastern shore of Toledo Bend
Audio files: 29
G2 patch files: 54
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:11 pm Post subject:
Howard,
Thanks for the time and effort to put this test together. I have listened to both takes and I must say that there is a horrible amount of aliasing noise in both. If there were some DSP code tweaks to OS 1.40, the tweaks did not do much to reduce aliasing, at least for the aliasing generated by this particular patch. I think that I hear a slight difference between the takes, but this may only be because I already know that the two were generated by different OS versions. So, based on the sound of these two takes and better judgment, my vote will have to be that the two OS versions sound the same.
About 24 hours ago, I thought about rolling my G2X back to 1.32 to try a similar test, but decided to try a quick test first. If I could hear a significant difference between the 1.32 Demo Software and the 1.40 loaded on the G2X, then I would go to the trouble of switching OS versions on the G2X for more detailed testing. After comparing the sound of several patches (including the sawAnimate.pch2 used in your test), I decided that I could not hear a significant difference between the two!
All of this leads me to believe that there were probably no DSP code tweaks to OS 1.40 specifically for improving the sound of the G2. _________________ varice
Joined: Dec 29, 2004 Posts: 961 Location: Northeastern shore of Toledo Bend
Audio files: 29
G2 patch files: 54
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:28 pm Post subject:
Fozzie wrote:
The fact that lfo's and osc's aren't synced do make the comparison semi-objective, however. I have focussed my listening on some specific parts of the demo, where I could hear clear differences. These could also have been caused by the free running oscillators
The takes do not sound exactly the same because of the free running oscillators and LFOs, but I do not think that exact duplication of sound is what this test is about. The test is about percieved sound quality differences between the takes generated by the two OS versions. The overall sound quality for the duration of the takes should not be affected much by the difference in phase of the oscillators during the recording of the two takes.
Just my opinion - what makes this test of which take sounds better very difficult is the fact that both takes sound bad because of the horrible aliasing! _________________ varice
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
Forum index » Clavia Nord Modular » Nord Modular G2 Discussion
FAQ
Calendar
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Chat Room
Does 1.4 sound different than 1.32?
