electro-music.com   Dedicated to experimental electro-acoustic
and electronic music
 
    Front Page  |  Articles  |  Radio
 |  Media  |  Forum  |  Wiki  |  Links  |  Store
Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
 FAQFAQ   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   LinksLinks
 RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in  Chat RoomChat Room 
 Forum index » Clavia Nord Modular » Nord Modular G2 Discussion
Does 1.4 sound different than 1.32?
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: Nord Modular Editors
Page 1 of 2 [27 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page: 1, 2 Next

Which sounds better?
Take 1 sounds better
37%
 37%  [ 6 ]
They sound the same to me
62%
 62%  [ 10 ]
Take 2 sounds better
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 16

Author Message
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 17606
Location: Allentown, PA
Audio files: 124
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:14 am    Post subject:  Does 1.4 sound different than 1.32?
Subject description: A semi-objejctive test
Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Just as a curiosity, I loaded 1.32 and played a phase shifter patch that G2IAN posted some time ago. See this topic: http://electro-music.com/forum/topic-8071.html and this one: http://electro-music.com/forum/topic-9712.html

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

Download
 Filename:  phase-shifter-take2.wav
 Filesize:  7.21 MB
 Downloaded:  839 Time(s)


phase-shifter-take1.wav
 Description:
Phase shifter test - take 1

Download
 Filename:  phase-shifter-take1.wav
 Filesize:  7.2 MB
 Downloaded:  859 Time(s)


Last edited by mosc on Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:18 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21977
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 17606
Location: Allentown, PA
Audio files: 124
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Fozzie



Joined: Jun 04, 2004
Posts: 875
Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chet



Joined: Nov 19, 2004
Posts: 231
Location: Lititz,PA,USA
Audio files: 7
G2 patch files: 35

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:40 am    Post subject:   Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

A blind listening test is a great idea. I don't have the download bandwidth until tomorrow, but I'll give them both a listen then.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jksuperstar



Joined: Aug 20, 2004
Posts: 2483
Location: Denver
Audio files: 1
G2 patch files: 18

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

My Opinion: Don't read if you haven't listened & voted yet.

*&YnklnaIThink#2HasMoreAliasingAnd#1IsHasMuchLessljknsadcnasdcsandcpjnsd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ian-s



Joined: Apr 01, 2004
Posts: 2574
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Audio files: 42
G2 patch files: 608

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
frater v.i.o.



Joined: Dec 19, 2005
Posts: 24
Location: Germany,Cologne
G2 patch files: 1

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cebec



Joined: Apr 19, 2004
Posts: 1064
Location: Virginia
Audio files: 3
G2 patch files: 31

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

frater v.i.o. wrote:
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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 17606
Location: Allentown, PA
Audio files: 124
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Tim Kleinert



Joined: Mar 12, 2004
Posts: 1023
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Audio files: 6
G2 patch files: 212

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I have 2 G2Xs. I haven't had time to update yet. I might update one to 1.4 and not the other and play them side by side.
_________________
beer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fozzie



Joined: Jun 04, 2004
Posts: 875
Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

That would be great, Tim, to really kill any myths (although I still believe) Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fozzie



Joined: Jun 04, 2004
Posts: 875
Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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:  8867 Time(s)

LeftChannelsWaveForms.JPG



LeftChannelsWaveForms2.JPG
 Description:
And a little further down the line
 Filesize:  27.71 KB
 Viewed:  8865 Time(s)

LeftChannelsWaveForms2.JPG



LeftChannelsWaveForms3.JPG
 Description:
I guess I made my point by now ;)
 Filesize:  165.68 KB
 Viewed:  8858 Time(s)

LeftChannelsWaveForms3.JPG


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 17606
Location: Allentown, PA
Audio files: 124
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Fozzie



Joined: Jun 04, 2004
Posts: 875
Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Ahh, good remark Mosc. I haven't actually looked at the patch itself, but I could/should have thought of that myself Embarassed

Very OT remark: just downloaded Audacity to look at the waves, and it's a very (!) nice program. Cool spectrum analysis tools & lots & lots more...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fozzie



Joined: Jun 04, 2004
Posts: 875
Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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 Exclamation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Blue Hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 20480
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 147
G2 patch files: 318

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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 :-)
_________________
Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21977
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Shocked

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. Shocked

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
gee



Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 1
Location: The Netherlands
Audio files: 1

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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.


G2_1.40vs1.32.mp3
 Description:

Download
 Filename:  G2_1.40vs1.32.mp3
 Filesize:  501.22 KB
 Downloaded:  241 Time(s)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Afro88



Joined: Jun 20, 2004
Posts: 701
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Audio files: 12
G2 patch files: 79

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Blue Hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 20480
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 147
G2 patch files: 318

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

gee wrote:
Hi there.


welcome

_________________
Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
deknow



Joined: Sep 15, 2004
Posts: 1307
Location: Leominster, MA (USA)
G2 patch files: 15

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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).

deknow Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
paul e.



Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1567
Location: toronto, canada
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

i perceive take 1 to have a slightly brighter sound..a bit more presence than take 2...

take 2 has a slighter darker tone that some may find more preferrable, as i did, so it's hard to say which sounded 'better'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
varice



Joined: Dec 29, 2004
Posts: 719
Location: Northeastern shore of Toledo Bend
Audio files: 22
G2 patch files: 49

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
varice



Joined: Dec 29, 2004
Posts: 719
Location: Northeastern shore of Toledo Bend
Audio files: 22
G2 patch files: 49

PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

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 Exclamation


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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: Nord Modular Editors
Page 1 of 2 [27 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Clavia Nord Modular » Nord Modular G2 Discussion
Jump to:  

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
e-m mkii

Please support our site. If you click through and buy from
our affiliate partners, we earn a small commission.


Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Copyright © 2003 through 2009 by electro-music.com - Conditions Of Use