[PD] Pd sounds better than Max?

Damian Stewart damian at frey.co.nz
Fri Mar 7 11:57:49 CET 2008


Roman Haefeli wrote:

> hey funny... i also heard people saying something similar the other way
> around.
> 
> since the same digital algorithm produces the same results on two
> different machines or in two different softwares, i think there are only
> very esoteric reasons to believe, that one sounds 'fuller' (what does it
> mean technically?) or 'richer' (more harmonics?) than the other. for me
> this goes to a similar direction as the discussion, if oxygen free,
> golden plated 8mm-diammeter speaker cables sound better than others (i
> would rather suspect a difference there than between max and pd).

well, he also said that it was because the [osc~] had a larger table size 
in Pd than in Max, which would make sense.

my initial assumption was that it was to do bit-depth. i used to scoff at 
people who claimed 24 bit was better; but then i spent some time in a 
studio working with 24 bit audio, and, well, you notice. (but both Pd and 
Max are 32 bit float, right?)

i hear you about the speaker cables; there are differences even amongst 
digital stuff though. for example when Ableton Live clips, to my ears it 
clips a lot nicer than ProTools does. (actually ProTools in general sounds 
very dead - its precision means that you have to work your ass off to get 
colour into your sound.) and back when i was composing in a multitrack 
sequencer environment, i remember choosing to use Cubase SX because its 
audio engine just sounded nicer than any of the other apps of the time 
(Cakewalk and Logic being the main competitors).

> hm.. thinking more about that, i wonder whether this guy thinks, that pd
> people do just different, probably subjectively better sounding stuff.
> or does he really think, that [phasor~] in pd sounds nicer than the
> [phasor~] in max? this would be actually quite easy to test, if there is
> any difference at all. create a wav with same frequency and phase of a
> [phasor~], once in pd, once in max, and then subtract the one from the
> other and if you do not get a completely silent file,
> then...............  *i shut up*      ;-)

nice idea, but i'd try it with an [osc~]. anyone want to volunteer?

-- 
damian stewart | +351 967 797 263 | damian at frey.co.nz
frey | live art with machines | http://www.frey.co.nz




More information about the Pd-list mailing list